Michigan Bill Could Mean Life in Prison for Parents or Docs Who Allow Gender Transition Treatment for Minors
Under H.B. 6454, prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones would be treated as a more severe form of child abuse than starving or abandoning a kid.
A bill introduced in the Michigan Legislature this week could mean life in prison for any parent or doctor who "consents to, obtains, or assists with a gender transition procedure for a child." The measure—H.B. 6454—amends the state's child abuse statute to define such actions as child abuse in the first degree.
Under current Michigan law, first-degree child abuse is defined as "knowingly or intentionally caus[ing] serious physical harm or serious mental harm to a child." It's punishable under Michigan law by "imprisonment for life or any term of years."
H.B. 6454 would add to the definition "knowingly or intentionally consent[ing] to, obtain[ing], or assist[ing] with a gender transition procedure for a child," if the person acting is "a child's parent or guardian or any other person who cares for, has custody of, has authority over a child regardless of the length of time that a child is cared for, in the custody of, or subject to the authority of that person, or a physician or other licensed medical professional." Gender transition procedures are defined to include not just surgical interventions but also the prescription of puberty blockers and hormones.
Yes, under the proposed change, prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to a teenager would be equivalent to severely beating a child. And it would be defined as a more severe form of abuse than starving or abandoning a kid.
The proposed statute says that allowing gender transition treatment for a minor—no matter the child's age—is a more severe form of child abuse than a "willful failure to provide food, clothing, or shelter necessary for a child's welfare," or the "willful abandonment of a child." It would also be defined as a more severe offense than negligence or recklessness that "causes serious physical harm or serious mental harm to a child," someone "knowingly or intentionally commit[ing] an act likely to cause serious physical or mental harm to a child," or someone "knowingly or intentionally cause[ing] physical harm to a child" that is not severe. And it would be in the same category as intentionally causing "a physical injury to a child that seriously impairs the child's health or physical well-being, including, but not limited to, brain damage, a skull or bone fracture, subdural hemorrhage or hematoma, dislocation, sprain, internal injury, poisoning, burn or scald, or severe cut."
Even if you're leery of prescribing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to minors, it's got to be clear that these things—and even more drastic surgical measures—are worlds apart from the kinds of pointless and savage abuse Michigan legislators would equate them to. Parents and doctors who consent to the former think they're helping, even if this wisdom may be debatable. And while some of these drugs and procedures can come with side effects—well, so do a lot of things. Yet we often still allow these things when a doctor deems them prudent or when the alternative might be worse.
It's one thing to say such treatments for minors should not be a first resort—that we should be cautious, and perhaps even require more medical checks and balances. But it's another entirely to define difficult treatment decisions made by doctors, parents, and kids together as equivalent to beating a child to the point of causing brain damage.
Alas, this absurdity seems to be gaining ground. Michigan is attempting to follow the lead of Texas, which earlier this year categorized the medical treatment of trans minors as child abuse. Enforcement of that policy is supposedly on hold as a lawsuit over it plays out, though recent court filings allege that investigations into trans kids are still taking place.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Excellent. Starvation short of death can be corrected without long term consequences. Abandoned kids, if that means left home alone or dropped off at a mall, are only in danger of being in danger for a day or two.
Puberty blockers and genital mutilation are forever.
WTF, Reason, is female genital mutilation now OK because it’s white kids and all 57 genders?
What part of permanent do you not understand?
How dumb are you child abusers? Man, child rape isn’t the same level of abuse as puberty blockers or genital mutilation surgery. Are you guys really so fucking stupid that you think anyone actually believes even broken bones are more permanent child abuse?
You can get over being raped. It can be hard but it can and does happen all of the time. You are never getting over being mutilated.
Jesus Christ if a kid suddenly identified as “blind” would reason be okay with their parents having their eyes cut out? Sadly, I think they would be if that is what elite opinion demanded.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this site.. http://www.Profit97.com
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a (ad-06) lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
Do superstitious, bigoted right-wingers still except circumcision from their ostensible outrage concerning treatment of children?
Carry on, slack-jawed hypocrites.
It’s nice when you reply to the spambots with your own spam.
You didn’t even bother to read his comment, did you?
There is actually a dysmorphic disorder where people feel more comfortable being crippled. It is very akin to gender dysmorphia. Reason will never bring it up.
Funny she brings up starvation. Should parents be allowed to encourage anorexia or work woth their children to be comfortable in their bodies?
I am in favor of progressives starving to death
Not their kids.
“Our children are our future, unless we stop them now!”—Homer Simpson
To these assholes, anorexia should be treated with diet pills, working towards gastric bypass surgery.
Hell, if a kid identified as Batman would we have to kill his parents? Or a Ninja turtle, do we have to surgically attach a shell?
And it’s funny because this is actually the logical conclusion to this whole “gender affirming care” debate. Back in the day, this kind of argument would have been seen as an overly-simplistic reductionist claim. Yet, with the inanity and insanity of modern positions on this issue, it’s now truly the logical outcome.
No, the logical conclusion is that kids can consent to sex, which should horrify us all (except Buttplug).
That is part of the logical conclusion as well.
You forgot to include Jeffy. Who is a HUGE grooming advocate.
if a kid suddenly identified as “blind” would reason be okay with their parents having their eyes cut out?
SIGHT???
according to reason there may be hesitation to cutting their eyes out, but certainly prescribing them something that would simply stop their eyes from properly functioning would be fine.
WTF, Reason, is female genital mutilation now OK because it’s white kids and all 57 genders?
Yes. Yes it is. They have gone batshit crazy.
They sure have. To lose track of the meaning of gender is unfortunate. To lose track of the meaning of sex at the same two is tragic. To lose track of the meaning of permanent at the same times begins to seem like more than a coincidence.
Gender is a meaningless bullshit term. Your mind and your identity are not separate from your body. If you cannot accept your body as it is in a profound way like rejecting your sex, the solution is to learn how to accept who you are not to mutilate your body hoping it will conform to some ideal in your head.
Instead of telling people and especially kids to learn to love and accept themselves as they are, transgenderism is telling them that they are freaks in need of radical transformative surgery to be normal. It is hard to think of many things more evil than that.
“Instead of telling people and especially kids to learn to love and accept themselves as they are, transgenderism is telling them that they are freaks in need of radical transformative surgery to be normal.”
It is utterly baffling to me how the Trans community has completely turned this entire fundamentalist equation on its head.
Fundie Conservative of 1950s: Dolls are for girls, and climbing trees is for boys. If you don’t feel this way, you are abnormal and must conform.
Liberal wave of 60s and 70s: These stereotypes are bizarre. Boys can like dolls, and girls can like climbing trees. Accept yourself and others as they are.
Trans Activist of today: Dolls are for Girls and climbing trees is for boys. If you don’t think this way, you are abnormal and we will mutilate your body to make you conform.
On the *checks notes* Wednesday in 2015 that this whole Gender thing exploded out of the gate, a few of the boards left-leaning “libertarians” (libertarian marxists) were slapped into stunned silence when this fact was carefully pointed out to them… that the transgender activists literally reinforce gender stereotypes.
Also, the trans movement is extremely homophobic. If you follow the controversies of Stonewall in the UK, that becomes abundantly clear.
the trans movement is extremely homophobic
That’s understating it. It’s an attempted genocide against Gays.
Mostly lesbians anyway. They have to accept the feminine penis or be labelled a terf.
Yeah, the trans movement encourages mutilation rather than accept diverse minds within each gender. It is neurosexist.
I’m still looking for the genital chart of the other 55 genders. Nothing. I’m starting to suspect they don’t exist.
You have to look at chromosomes.
There is xx, and xy, everyone is familiar with that then there is
I, ii, iii, iv, v, vi, vii, viii, ix, x, Xi, xii, xiii, xiv, xv, xvi, xvii, xviii, xix, xxi, xxii, xxiii, xxiv, xxv, xxvi, xxvii, xviii, xix, xxx, xxxi, xxii, xxiii, xxxiv, xxxv, xxvi, xxvii, xxxviii, xxxix, xxxx, xxxxi, xxxxii, xxxxii, xxxxii, xxxxiv, xxxxv, xxxxvi, xxxxvii, xxxxviii, xxxxix, xxxxx, xxxxxi, xxxxxii, xxxxxiii, xxxxiv, and lastly €¥
You only counted xx and xy and then counted to 44 in Roman, skipping the 20’s and using xxxx for the 40s instead of xl. That leaves out who knows how many more genders and even more confusion…ya bigot. 😉
female mutilation just a few years ago for cultural and religious reasons was to be outlawed. But today do what you want to your kid add arms, remove arms, its as frighting and fetish level as in the movie “Hell Raiser”. “Hell Raiser” has arrived to your local school, its the next level of tattoing only far worse
Staring Lying Jeffy as Pinhead.
It’s still icky if conservative Christians/Jews/Muslims are doing it.
Pinhead would slaughter those sick fucking progs.
Yes, worlds apart because they are permanent, irreversible, forever.
You clowns are beyond hope. You can rot in hell and for the first time, I hope the fundies are right about there being a literal hell, because then maybe you’ll understand what the word permanent means.
Summed up my reaction nicely.
Suicide is also forever but apparently that doesn’t matter.
This is a really disturbing issue imo for third parties to stick their noses in. It doesn’t matter which way they are leaning into the decision making – they are leaning with absolutely ZERO knowledge of the particulars, and zero interest in the outcome. If this ain’t an obviously Hayekian knowledge problem for libertarians, then nothing is.
Anecdotes will never change anyone’s political opinions – and especially not the assholes who infest this sewer. But what real life stories of people in this situation can do is demonstrate how fucking difficult real decisions are.
But hey – only elections and political signaling matters right?
Should we starve anorexics because they think they are fat?
Just checking for consistency.
Are you one of those libertarians who always thinks there oughta be a law prohibiting/mandating this/that/other?
Just saying.
BTW – Are you another one of them Mises crowd types?
Do you think the state should step in if a parent was starving their child because they thought they were anorexic or not?
Kinda deflected from the question there. Interesting.
“Mises crowd” = “I don’t have to engage your argument because you’re a poopy head” to the liberaltarians here.
Jslave isn’t even a liberaltarian.
Lolbertarian? Is that below liberaltarian?
He’s a deranged wackjob conspiracy theorist Chauvista nutcase.
You could answer the question.
If a 60 pound 15 year old said to the doctor “I am too fat” — would you approve said doctor putting them on a strict diet? Or would you find the indirect method of killing the child somewhat wrong?
If not, could you explain why anorexia and trans are remotely different?
This is one of the better analogies I’ve heard. Especially given the, “body positive” nonsense.
If 30 years ago you’d told me that the Liberal Left would be all-in on mutilating children so that they could never have children, *and* be expending massive political capital to eliminate women’s sports, I’d have had you committed.
To be fair, what the left is doing now isn’t all that different from what they used to do: sterilization of homosexuals and the mentally ill; aborting minorities; and segregation. The policies are the same, it’s only the language that has evolved.
It is amazing watching the person who demanded everyone get vaccines and wear masks be for cutting of dicks of minors.
Are you one of those progs that think horrific abuse of children, no matter how vile and destructive, is always ok?
Anyone with school-aged children has skin in this game. Do you have school-aged children? Then fuck off.
Aah ok. So that’s the criteria for your ilk of ‘libertarian interference in and coercion of others’!
So are just your kids your property – or are all kids your property?
I’m not a male in prison yet I support rape laws. It will not impact me directly yet I think we should not permit that.
Do you support rape laws? If so, how is this different?
As a libertarian, do you not believe the state has the right or obligation to establish laws that protect children?
I think we all know the answer to that:
The government should force them to wear masks all day, every day. And get any experimental shots the government deems necessary.
A child decides they are trans. Parents support that decision. They go through the rigorous medical and psychological procedures involved. Everyone’s happy, everyone’s made free choices.
Clearly the only way to protect that child is to throw their parents into a prison cell for the rest of their lives.
What happens when a child decides that taking heroin is a good idea and the parents assist? What happens when the child decides that they want to be a bird? What happens when the child decides not to wear a seat belt or sit in the child seat in the car?
And you may need to read up on those “rigorous medical and psychological procedures.” Esepcially in light of the tremendous monetary windfall clinics are already salivating over with providing the medical equivalent of a subscription service to the poor souls they medically “help.”
Do respected medical authorities equate heroin use with being trans? I’m not sure how that’s a relevant comparison.
If a child decides he wants to be a bird, it sounds like a child being a child. I don’t think the state should throw their parents in prison for that either. Call me an anarchist.
Seatbelts? I dunno. If I’m a libertarian, I kind of think the state throwing people in prison for not wearing seatbelts might be a bit of an overreach.
But generally I think your problem is equating transition with harm automatically without even asking a trans person what they think.
I didn’t equate heroin use with being trans, I used heroin use as another form of people choosing to do what they want with their bodies. Nice feigned ignorance to avoid that question.
Well done on the feigned ignorance about the bird subject.
But you’re not a libertarian, so what is your thought about seatbelt laws? Since again, you decided to play the feigned ignorance game again along with false contextualization.
And transition is harm. There’s no question about it. Whether the harm works to eliminate more pressing and harmful matters is hugely yet to be seen or shown. That’s the problem. So when you take such massively consequential harm and impose that on kids without any meaningful data to show that such harm is a good idea, I take issue with it.
It amuses me that you, as a gay man who ostensibly has had to fight against the boxes imposed on you by backwoods Oklahoman society, are such a champion for “trans” people.
And fuck off with your bullshit appeals to freedom. Everyone that has ever interacted with you for more than 5 minutes knows you don’t give a one fuck about freedom or liberty.
“Do respected medical authorities equate heroin use with being trans? I’m not sure how that’s a relevant comparison.”
Medical authorities who prescribe genital mutilation as a treatment for mental or emotional illness cease to be respectable, and are very much in the same vein as those who would prescribe weight loss for an anorexic or pharmaceutical grade heroin for a junkie.
Do respected medical authorities equate heroin use with being trans?
In surveys where there is no awareness of the diagnosis of ‘trans’ but only broad description of symptoms, yes.
Everyone does.
Including trans advocates.
Including YOU.
When the issue and treatments are described in such a manner that one cannot immeciately ascribe ‘gender affirmation’, the issue appears to clearly be delusion and the treatments are clearly cosmetic exacerbations of that delusion that are so obviously non-functional that further mental and physical damage is almost a certainty.
It’s surgical mutilation you silly faggot.
A child decides they are a slut. Parents support that decision. Everybody gets a turn with Tommy’s tushy. Tony is happy.
“They go through the rigorous medical and psychological procedures involved.”
By most accounts, there is virtually no rigorous anything. It wouldn’t “Affirm” their “condition”, after all. Do not assume that their “We need to AFFIRM them” is some codeword for “intense medical scrutiny”
“Everyone’s happy”
Suicide numbers clearly state otherwise. Mutilation is a terrible suicide preventative.
“everyone’s made free choices.”
Tony, unsurprisingly, making pedo defenses now.
“Clearly the only way to protect that child is to throw their parents into a prison cell for the rest of their lives.”
If a mother or father broke a child’s arm, there’d be repurcussions. Significant ones. This is just measures worse than a broken arm.
Tony has fully lied about the rigorous examinations. British health was shown to prescribe drugs the first interaction.
I still trust those doctors over you and your favored politicians. Shall I have them arrested?
Arrest most politicians. Most have committed enough crimes to justify it. At the same time, arrest doctors mutilating kids. You can arrest both types if needed. It’s not like “Well, we’re not going to arrest this rapist because we have murderers to arrest instead”
You? You can’t do shit. Thankfully. Anyone who ghoulishly mutilates children under the cover of ‘transitioning’ belongs in a landfill.
Just like you.
Yes, Tony, Dr. Mengele can do no wrong in your book.
A child decides they are trans. Parents decide not to support that decision. The child grows up as a happy, normal heterosexual. Everybody is happy, everybody made free choices, Yet, progressives want to throw the parents in prison.
I think the state should stay entirely out of the raising of kids. But since progressives insist involving the state in the raising, education, sexual indoctrination, and political indoctrination of kids, I want the state to do so in a way that does the least amount of harm. And that means, among other things, prohibiting the sterilization of children.
You are one sick dog!
The treatment for suicidal tendencies or depression is counseling and possibly medication.
Or you might prefer lobotomies.
“Suicide is also forever but apparently that doesn’t matter.”
I don’t think parents should be able to assist their children with committing suicide, either.
Liberals do.
You do realize third parties with State sanctioned authority are already sticking their noses in and manipulating children, right? You leftists sure do have a hardon for murdering, mutilating and generally abusing children.
Covid. Deny unvaccinated from hospital care. Is that you who wants the government to penalize the likes of Djokovic?
Yeah, I’m not seeing the downside of “Hey, don’t mutilate kids”.
Can you believe that we are living in a time where arguing that adults shouldn’t assist children in removing their genitals is looked at controversially?!
Which leads to the question, why are people like Tony in any way taken seriously? Or allowed to exist?
Yeah, actually sounds pretty reasonable to me, given the irreversible nature of these treatments.
Puberty blockers are not forever. The whole point of them is to delay puberty so that kids have time to figure out which puberty they want to go through. If you stop taking them puberty happens normally.
Puberty, by contrast, is forever. If someone goes through puberty their body is irrevocably changed. That is why if there is a reasonable chance your child is trans, it is your duty as a parent to provide them with puberty-blocking hormones. If it turns out they were wrong or confused they can always stop taking them and go through puberty slightly later. If they weren’t wrong, they will forever be stuck with a suboptimal body.
I assume by “genital mutilation” you mean the surgeries that rearrange genitals into a configuration their owner prefers. I could argue that this is no more “mutilation” than fixing a cleft palate, or a nose job. But I don’t actually need to, because gender confirmation surgery is not performed on minors. Trans people are legally required to wait until they reach adulthood before surgery is done, regardless of whether their parents support them or not. The only people who are saying that surgery is being performed on minors are stupid people, liars, and stupid liars. Of the three, which one are you?
“Puberty blockers are not forever.”
They are not reversible. Sorry to break it to you.
“If you stop taking them puberty happens normally.”
Absolutely false.
“If it turns out they were wrong or confused they can always stop taking them and go through puberty slightly later. If they weren’t wrong, they will forever be stuck with a suboptimal body.”
This is the basic level of scientific intellectual rigor of the entire trans movement. The first pillar of their entire belief system is false, so everything else cascades down as well. Scientology has more intellectual rigor behind it than trans theology (and it is a religious cult at this point).
“The only people who are saying that surgery is being performed on minors are stupid people, liars, and stupid liars.”
The quacks pose for pictures WITH the kids they fucking mutilated.
The theory was that they weren’t irreversible, that they’d just delay puberty, and if you stopped giving them, it would resume. That theory turned out to be wrong. Turns out you’ve only got a limited window in which to go through puberty, and if you miss it, you’re screwed.
Absolutely true. There ar even Ty of real world examples of people severely damaged forever.
This is as good a reason as so many others to annihilate the progressive movement once and for all.
Hey shreek, remember how you got you banned for posting dark web links to hardcore child pornography?
This is fair.
These are kids screaming for attention with self-esteem issues. Like the “goth” or “emo” kids of previous decades, “trans” is just a way for kids who are “left out” because they are not good at sports or popular or whatever to belong. The last thing you want is some groomers roaming the halls and convincing the kids they are not the biology that evolution affirmed to them. Puberty blockers and surgery is child abuse..period end of story. Anyone advocating this (mostly for either financial gain or praying sexually on kids) is sick..very very sick.
Great news. Finally legislators are standing up against this atrocity.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i’ve had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here……..>>> OnlineCareer1
Mutilating minor children is a serious crime. What a revolutionary concept. Anyone who would do that to a child deserves to go to prison for life.
Sounds like bad news for those who inflict circumcision on children, regardless of whether that assault is motivated by silly, childish, obsolete superstition.
Reason is now pro-genital mutilation?
Yes they are. They used to be agin it, when it was just African girls. Then they got woke and went for broke.
Where the heck did they say that?
For the record, for the umpteenth time, doctors in the US won’t do genital reassignment surgery on anyone under 18.
What kind of perversely limited definition do you have for surgery on genitals?
Oh, and while we’re at it, [citation needed] for both the claim itself, and the “umpteenth time” claim. For the record.
Oh, I see your quibble. Gender reassignment surgery. Nature made the mistake of misassigning the wrong gender, and the surgeons are merely assigning the correct gender.
You’re going to have to do better than that, dipshit. You aren’t recognizing the 57 varieties of gender. You are assuming a binary world of right and wrong genders.
It is odd, though, that with these dozens of genders…surgeries only offer two.
It’s not happening.
Ok, it’s happening, but it’s not as bad as you say.
I think this link is broken.
Thank you.
Oh, there’s the link.
Looks like you are quoting from this page, which you didn’t link to:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24238576/
So, back in 2014, there were anecdotal reports of some girls receiving genital altering surgery. The page goes on to say: “A new set of ethical guidelines was created in order to support treatment professionals in their decision making process.”
I’m sure they’d never lie.
Yes, and there’s a new set of ethical guidelines from the central authority on this that says surgeries may begin at 15.
Link?
See below.
He has been given it a half dozen times.
Evolution affirms your biology..you can’t. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs mental help. You can imitate the other sex but you are NOT the other sex.
Leave confused kids who are screaming for attention alone. They will go back to the goth or emo identify they used to have to get them through high school
Can I get top surgery if I’m under 18?
Yes, I never said that “top surgery” isn’t done before age 18. I quite intentionally said precisely that genital surgery is not done before 18.
And that is okay? That is not multination? God you are dishonest.
That’s Mike’s thing. He defines the issue in a narrowest possible terms, so he doesn’t have to answer for things like double mastectomies performed on teenagers. That’s not TECHNICALLY genital surgery, so it’s all good, because removing healthy breasts from a teenaged girl for purely cosmetic reasons is not at all a permanent mutilation of her body.
And it is understood by all involved that “gender affirming care” for minors including puberty blockers, hormones, and mastectomies are part of a course of treatment intended to culminate in surgical genital “transitioning”. Even though they are not yet supposed to do the “bottom” surgery on minors (yet), the “treatment” that minors do get is clearly part of the process of surgical “transitioning”.
>removing healthy breasts from a teenaged girl for purely cosmetic reasons is not at all a permanent mutilation of her body.
That’s because it isn’t? Let’s ignore transmen and women and just talk about cis people. The actress, Soleil Moon Frye had a breast reduction when she was 16. Her breasts made her feel uncomfortable and she was afraid of being typecast as “sexy” characters. This seems completely reasonable. I don’t see why she would have needed to wait an extra two years if her breasts were bothering her.
However, there are other women with breasts the same size, or even larger, who are perfectly happy with them. “Healthy” is not objective. A person’s body is healthy for them is it is doing what they want it to and unhealthy if it isn’t.
Besides, cosmetic surgery on breasts is reversible. Surgeons can adjust the size of breasts pretty easily nowadays.
“cis people.”
The term “people” is sufficient. If you insist on a label, “normal” is more descriptive.
“The actress, Soleil Moon Frye had a breast reduction when she was 16. Her breasts made her feel uncomfortable and she was afraid of being typecast as “sexy” characters. This seems completely reasonable. I don’t see why she would have needed to wait an extra two years if her breasts were bothering her.”
No difference between “these cause me pain. Can you reduce them some?” and “Cut these off ENTIRELY because I think I’m really a boy”? I do not support lopping off limbs, but if your leg is gangrenous, that might be the necessary treatment.
“However, there are other women with breasts the same size, or even larger, who are perfectly happy with them. “Healthy” is not objective. A person’s body is healthy for them is it is doing what they want it to and unhealthy if it isn’t.”
…so anorexics are healthier when they starve themselves so their body better fits their mental picture of themselves? Sounds a little suspicious there.
“Besides, cosmetic surgery on breasts is reversible. Surgeons can adjust the size of breasts pretty easily nowadays.”
Reputable ones will not lop off the breasts of a child without an exceedingly good reason to do so. “I feel like a boy” is not such a reason.
All of these opinions are well considered, I’m sure, but the important question is when do you send the armed government goons in to arrest people?
When they are harming others.
Right about the time you’re lowering your fly and cinching up the ropes on one of your 8 year old victims, faggot pedophile.
Yep…pedos and groomers deserve a cold cell in purgatory for life.
Opps..a hot cell..you get the point
“Besides, cosmetic surgery on breasts is reversible. Surgeons can adjust the size of breasts pretty easily nowadays.”
Ghatanathoah has now twice confused this issue with medical quackery. Previously they claimed that puberty blockers cause no permanent harm, and now they are saying that mastectomies are reversible. This is not true. It is false.
Breast tissue, once removed, cannot be put back. And when you have completely removed the mammary glands, the woman loses the ability to produce milk and nurse children. This cannot be reversed. With the use of implants, a person might restore the appearance of breasts, but they will never function like breasts.
But this seems to be Ghata’s MO. They parachute in here at thread death and make false or misleading claims hoping to confuse the public.
For the record, Soleil Moon Frye had gigantomastia. That is a medical condition where the breasts abnormally grow, and continue growing, to the point where they can be a danger to the woman. The treatment for gigantomastia is rarely a full mastectomy, but rather breast reduction surgery, where some of the fatty tissue in the breast is removed, but not the milk glands.
As others have noted, breast reduction is still a drastic, and irreversible surgery, but it is a smaller impact (as the breast remains a functional organ) and may be warranted to prevent a greater harm to the patient. This is not at all like the complete mastectomy being performed on minors.
As I have noted elsewhere, I think it is absolutely an immoral breach of trust for a parent to perform this treatment on their children when treatment could be deferred until they are an adult making these decisions for themselves. But, I am also skeptical that the government can effectively police the nuances of what is “abuse” and what is “preference” and what is “treatment” between a parent and their children. That said, given how the “pro-transitioning” crowd continues to spout witch-doctor levels of medical falsehoods, I find it very, very difficult to take their arguments as anything but nefarious.
It’s not OK to use the power of the state to force people to do things, or refrain from doing things, to their own body.
Not every momentary discomfort you have in life has to be rectified by the government. Do you get that or not?
It always amazes me when leftists who want government to basically make all decisions for people, to provide everything to people, to regulate every aspect of life for people, claim to have a point where government involvement is too much.
I’m merely approaching this subject from a libertarian point-of-view, which I often take in good faith, since being a liberal or progressive automatically entails skepticism about the state. I’m happy to go into a public health argument as well, but the only hypocrite here is you.
So, you take a position you don’t believe in to establish a fallacy to those who you broadly paint with a particular position? Interesting.
And, how am I a hypocrite?
All positions start with a premise, and an intelligent person is capable of arguing from multiple premises.
My liberalism, if you will, contains libertarianism within it, if you define that as being myopically fixated on the threat of state power. Liberalism has always focused on the threat of state power. It just also includes in its sphere of concern the threat of corporate power, the threat of deprivation, the threat from religion, and so forth. So I am perfectly capable of engaging this discussion only focusing on state power, since state power is what all you libertarians are so eager to wield in this matter.
You’re not just a hypocrite if you all of a sudden want to wield state power to hurt people for the crime of being trans, you’re also a bad libertarian and a bad liberal.
So, you smugglishly explain your nuanced political position and beliefs all while ascribing simplistic mindset positions to those you disagree with?
I’d admit to being smug if I didn’t think you’d wake up tomorrow wanting state goons to arrest all smug people.
Is life easier for you to just assign false narratives to people and live in fairly propaganda laden world?
That’s the only way I can understand your hysteric, almost childish labeling of me that’s not even remotely accurate.
“You’re not just a hypocrite if you all of a sudden want to wield state power to hurt people for the crime of being trans”
Who advocates arresting trans people? You do not arrest somebody suffering from a mental disorder for having said disorder.
You do punish people who cause those same victims harm off of their disorder.
It’s ok to use the government to protect children.
Tony. Be honest. You just want to fuck kids. And you see this as the path to that.
I didn’t say it is OK.
You really don’t say much. That’s kind of the problem.
Bubba said, “Reason is now pro-genital mutilation?”
I said enough to explain why that was an unfair accusation to make against Reason. I intentionally didn’t say any more.
I didn’t make any claims about mutilation. I made a very specific claim about genital surgery under 18 in the US.
I intentionally claimed nothing more, because I know there are too surgeries under 18 and possibly genital surgery in non-US counties under 18.
Jeez, I’m trying to be precise in what I say and I get called “dishonest” for things I never claimed were true.
And you continue to be wrong.
So your position is that the best people to make these decisions are not parents, mental health professionals, and surgeons, but politicians?
This Tony guy gets it. We shouldn’t leave decisions to politicians.
We should not leave them to “mental health professionals” who are of sketchy use at the best of times.
Politicians? You mean, elected representatives who are there to enact laws to protect members of the public?
How is denying trans people their medical care and sending their parents to prison if they help pay for it protecting anyone?
Since you’re so into using state power to enforce your various shaky ideas about what constitutes helping people, I will be along shortly with my very libertarian list of demands. Spoiler alert: there’s lots of taxes.
The idea is to protect children from wildly consequential medical decisions not supported by science and pushed by adults engaged in a modern, pseudo-intellectual fad.
It isnt medical care you sick fuck.
The world is not as simple as you thought when you were taught about it as a child.
–The most earth-shattering revelation to any conservative
It’s just like I’ve definitively concluded. It’s not left vs. right. It’s smart vs. fucking retarded. The only thing going on in your every political belief is the deep, painful hatred of any fact that isn’t exactly as you learned in sunday school. You’re just dumb. You’re just fucking dumb and have never read a book.
The projection in your comment is so amazing.
The world is not as simple as you thought when you were taught about it as a child.
In this case I believe it is – to sane people. As a child we are taught that boys are boys and girls are girls and we’re taught how to identify them. We are not taught about mental illness and delusion [generally speaking] or parental munchausen by proxy.
Society does try to minimize damage to self and others that might be committed by mentally unstable people. This is a legitamate function of the state or any responsible person with ability to act.(didnt want to appear to imply that it would be the sole realm of the state to act… as we have seen
, the state can be just as idiotic as some parents who find the idea of mutilating their own children to make them social fashion accessories)
There are no “trans people”at the age of six. JC…are the kids straight or gay at six? Did you know? These are mostly kids screaming for attention..10 years ago they would be in the “goth” or “emo” groups as they are not the jocks or popular kids. And evolution affirms your gender you don’t. Now if you want to imitate the other biological sex you can do it but leave the kids alone…
Any adult advocating for puberty blockers or mutilation has either lost their marbles, is collecting a big revenue streams, or has evil intent for kids…
Statement on Adolescent top surgery.
Ok, it’s happening, but because people are being mean to us, we’ve suspended it.
Top… surgery for adolescents has been suspended due to mean tweets.
Again, doesn’t say anything about their having done genital surgery on anyone under 18.
You’re really just evil.
He’s evil because he is defending the right of people who repeatedly say they want this surgery, and who reliably say afterwards that they are glad they got this surgery, to get this surgery? He’s evil because he is arguing against the people who keep insisting against all evidence that teenagers are being harmed? even though the teenagers themselves insist they are not being harmed, and there are tons of studies saying that gender-affirming care helps them, rather than harms them?
He is the one that wants to help children and teens. You are the one that wants to hurt them. What’s ironic is that you are not even aware of this, because you refuse to believe that they need the care they repeatedly tell you they do.
Studies and evidence do not remotely show gender-affirming care helps.
That settles it, throw them all in prison.
Please show where I said that. Or, is this just another one of your disingenuous ascriptions?
“who reliably say afterwards that they are glad they got this surgery”
I’d love to see this proven. Be sure to include the actual response rate to these studies. Because the response rate is abysmal and suicide rates are basically unchanged.
“He’s evil because he is arguing against the people who keep insisting against all evidence that teenagers are being harmed?”
Yeah, mutilating their bodies and basically neutering them before they even hit puberty seems like it’s no big deal, huh?
The only positive I can think of is that it is progressives whose kids are having this done to them so this idiocy might die out on its own in a few years. Shame the bodycount left behind…but at least Tony and Ghata here can feel superior that these kids “made their own choices”.
Which, as I’ve said earlier, sounds like what a pedo would say.
“even though the teenagers themselves insist they are not being harmed”
Anorexics believe themselves to be fat. Mental illness is not really a solid way to make good choices.
“What’s ironic is that you are not even aware of this, because you refuse to believe that they need the care they repeatedly tell you they do.”
You tell anorexics that they are really fat, don’t you?
Genital surgery doesn’t happen before puberty. I don’t know how many times people need to tell you freaks this. So you’re going to have to go a step down on the ladder of hysteria and see if your excuse for employing state violence still works for you.
You are talking like there isn’t a whole industry of medical professionals with ethical guidelines out there. Even if you thought that wasn’t good enough, why the fuck do you think inserting politicians into the mix will improve it?
I love the irony of a supporter of genital removal surgery for minors calling people who are against such actions freaks.
“You are talking like there isn’t a whole industry of medical professionals with ethical guidelines out there.”
For trans bullshit — there is not. There are activists who say “Well, that is really OK” and doctors who bitch when people criticize them for deciding that money is more important than the health of the youth.
“Even if you thought that wasn’t good enough, why the fuck do you think inserting politicians into the mix will improve it?”
We should not question police when it comes to law enforcement as well, right? I mean, they are the experts and what the fuck can politicians or activists do to improve things?
Just to be clear, you want politicians to send people to prison if they aren’t anything but hostile to their trans kids.
Everyone can see you people are fucking fascists dude. Why do we even bother going through these issues one by one? Asking if you would kindly please not immediately run to government force every time something happens on Twitter that rubs you the wrong way is beside the point. You’re all-on on using the power of the state to enforce your every whim.
Of course it won’t be your every whim, it’ll be theirs. You sure those will line up with your preferences the whole time? You sure you don’t have anything going on that they could stick their noses into?
Why do I have to constantly be teaching libertarians how to be libertarians? Why are the live-and-let-live folks the least capable of handling even the smallest amount of challenge to their cultural assumptions before sending state guns in?
“Just to be clear, you want politicians to send people to prison if they aren’t anything but hostile to their trans kids.”
People suffering from schizophrenia think people trying to prevent them from listening to voices in their head are hostile to them. Such is life. When somebody has a significant mental disorder, protecting them from themselves is a sad necessity.
And, again, I would hope you would not call an anorexic fat, even if it is mean to say that they are incorrect about their physical condition.
>I’d love to see this proven. Be sure to include the actual response rate to these studies.
Done As you can see, the regret rates was around 1%. Of the nearly 8,000 people they surveyed, less than 80 regretted it. Also, your argument about suicide seems to be out of date , new studies show that gender affirming care does reduce suicidal ideation.
A survey of studies (not an actual study, mind you) with no information on how many responded, how many were duplicates, etc is pointless.
The response rate to these studies are notoriously low. Surveying those studies with that issue does not answer any questions.
Oh, REEEEEEEEEEAAAAALLY?!
Then why do over 90% of post-op trans either switch back or commit suicide?
Everything you just posted is bullshit. Regret rates are now estimated at 30%. No decline in long term suicide rates.
How do you push such bullshit? We have linked the incorrect anysis of the primary 16 studies ignorant people like you push here quite a few times.
There is a reason Europe is already pulling back from the craze.
Regret rates are established as somewhere between 1% and less than 1%. In other words, they are less than the odds of dying of COVID, which the Reason commenters have spent the last two years assuring me is such a tiny chance that we shouldn’t act afraid of it at all. It seems like they have pretty different standards when it comes to trans people. Suddenly everything must be sacrificed for even the slightest risk.
This isn’t a craze. This is helping people.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/
Evidence that it reduces suicide rates is basically non-existent
“As a physician I believe deeply in, and abide by my profession’s commitment to, “do no harm.””
Literally, “doing nothing = doing harm” in the background of carving up organs in the vague hope of producing a positive medical outcome. Bold strategy Cotton…
It really is astounding how post-ethics, post-civil rights, and post-psychoanalytics medical science had regressed to the phrenology, battlefield surgery, and Galen-esque vapors, humors, and daemons of the pre-Civil War Era. *Almost* like the medical profession of the last 175 yrs. was a bunch of ghouls all along and just really good at covering up/deflecting/deferring their sociopathy.
The Mengele Center for care here.
Now, in fairness they said ‘teens AND young adults’. So maybe what these fucking ghouls should have done is separate the two out instead of saying ‘AND’ if they don’t provide all of the below for teens AND adults.
Thanks for the fairness.
Where do you admit to being wrong about genitals?
So, again I knew about “top surgery” and never claimed it doesn’t happen under 18. Re-read what I wrote.
Is “top surgery” okay in your mind? Since you claim genital surgeries are not happening, I assume you support the proposed Michigan law?
It wouldn’t be OK for my child. And I tend to think it’s probably not OK for other kids. BUT, I’m not OK with using government to interfere in other’s parenting decisions.
What about parenting decisions to give their child heroin?
Interesting you brought up a hypothetical which, like genital altering surgery, isn’t a problem that comes up a whole lot in the real world.
I don’t think we, as a society, should sit around making up laws about hypotheticals that don’t actually happen.
Yet, you’ve been shown it actually happens and choose to ignore that. Why? I have no idea. And parents actually do give children drugs, that’s why there are laws against it.
I’ve been shown it actually happened. Which “it” are we talking about at this point?
Are there documented cases of parents giving their kids heroin? Why did you move the goal post from heroin specifically to drugs generically?
If you weren’t so darned busy trying to pull a gotcha on me, you might find that you and I agree on a lot.
Not trying a gotcha. Gender reassignment surgery and medical intervention for minors does occur and is being argued for it to occur much more. That you don’t know that is a fault of your understanding of the modern world than mine in not demonstrating it to you.
And no goal post shift involved. Drugs, including heroin, are given to kids by parents. I’ve even prosecuted such cases and removed children from their homes because of it. How you see that as a goal post shift is honestly amazing.
And we might agree on a lot. I wouldn’t know because you tend to be one who trolls with a few words and never actually engages in conversation.
I made a very specific statement about genital surgery, in the US, under 18 in response to a comment Bubba Jones wrote.
You keep bringing up all kinds of things outside what I said, and now it’s heroin. You are totally trying to “gotcha” me.
OK, describe (and preferably link to) a case you prosecuted where the parent gave their child heroin. How old was the child? Give me some details.
What you are doing is gaslighting and trying to change the argument as a defense of the actions children are part of. Youre not fooling anybody Mike.
Mike,
How about you answer my question rather than continuing to deflect?
“ OK, describe (and preferably link to) a case you prosecuted where the parent gave their child heroin. How old was the child? Give me some details.”
Top surgeries for minors. New York Times.
Ghouls, to the last one of them.
Top surgery, again.
AGain, you think that is okay? You are arguing a distinction without difference.
There’s no difference between genitals and breasts? There is in my book.
Do you support Chinese footbinding?
Chinese footbinding was not performed to make women more satisfied with their bodies. It was performed to make men more satisfied with women’s bodies, because men found it attractive for some reason. Once the practice ceased men stopped finding it attractive, fortunately.
Surgery for trans people is the literal opposite of footbinding. It is performed to make transpeople themselves more satisfied with their bodies. Denying transpeople surgery is more analogous to footbinding, since it is placing what other people want for the transperson’s body above what the transperson wants, and what is healthy for them.
Furthermore, even if I were to accept your analogy, gender confirmation surgery is not disabling like footbinding. It is no more disabling than most forms of cosmetic surgery. I think we can all agree that people should be allowed to get mild, nondisabling cosmetic surgery like nose jobs or breast augmentation, even if the motive is the same as the motive for footbinding (i.e. attracting men). So it is the extreme disabling nature of footbinding that makes it so repugnant, rather than the fact that it involves changing your body in some way.
Sterilization is not disabling? Breast removal is not disabling? Loss of muscle from hormone poisoning is not disabling? Bone density loss from puberty blockers is not disabling? I guess you consider reproductive organs vestigial.
That article is wrong. The preponderance of the evidence is that top surgery is highly effective. Studies keep coming out saying so. The science is pretty much settled at this point. Your side has been disproven. Take the loss gracefully. It’s not too late for you to stop hurting people and start helping them.
Also, don’t forget that top surgery is already performed on minors for a variety of non-gender-dysphoria-related reasons, like simple breast reductions. It is significantly more reversible than surgery to the genitals, so it makes sense that it is less regulated.
But what I find really astounding is that not only are you incapable of believing that trans teenagers might actually be telling the truth about their condition, you are also incapable of believing that other people believe them. You keep calling the surgeons who perform those surgeries “ghouls,” presumably because you are literally not capable of believing that they might believe the teens and be trying to help them. So instead you assume they must just be taking advantage of people to get paid. What exactly is wrong with your imagination that you are not capable of thinking that other people believe different things than you do?
When people believe things that are objectively false, they are delusional. Facilitating the self-harm of delusional people in pursuit of acting out their delusions is evil. Doing so for a child ought to be a crime.
I agree. Parents who are deluded into thinking their trans children are the gender they were initially assigned are delusional. If they deny their kids gender-affirming care (out of delusion, rather than some mundane reason like not being able to afford it) then they are evil.
People need to accept that gender is in the mind, not the body. If a man was in a horrible car accident that destroyed most of his body, and the reconstructive surgeons suggested it would be easier to reconstruct him as a woman, so they should do that, that would be absurd. If scientists found a way to take a woman’s brain out of her body and put it, still alive and conscious, in a vat, she would still be a woman, even though she was now a living brain with no female genitalia or sexual characteristics.
There is objectively no such thing as “gender”. No people “are” a “gender”. It is merely a pop culture concept. Sex is not “assigned”; it is observed.
gender is in the mind
That is my point.
Did you really just post the study involving a single 3 month post op survey?
Are you a fucking retard?
Why are we suddenly supposed to call mastectomies “top surgery” ? Are we now pretending that females don’t have breasts? If a teenage girl suffers from gender dysphoria do her breasts morph into malignant growths requiring “top surgery”? Or are you just into mutilating female bodies?
I’m just using the commonly used term, I am indifferent about the words used. If anyone wants their breasts to be a different size then what they are, for any reason at all, regardless of whether the cause is gender dysphoria or something else, then it is good for them to get surgery that makes the breasts the size they want. If they want no breasts that’s fine. If they want smaller breasts, also fine. If they want larger breasts, fine. If they want ludicrously huge Q-cups, also fine.
In order for a surgery to be mutilation it has to be unwanted by the person who undergoes it.
In order for a surgery to be mutilation it has to be unwanted by the person who undergoes it.
No.
In order for a surgery to be mutilation it has to not be able to do what it is advertised as being able to do.
A breast augmentaion augments the breasts. A reduction reduces them. Rhinoplasty reshapes the nose.
All these things do what they are advertised to do.
Gender affirming surgeries do NOT.
It is not possible yet to actually surgically alter someone’s sex or gender.
Cosmetic surgical procedures can provide non-functional simulacra, but they cannot provide what they are purporting to provide.
Hence ‘mutilation’.
doctors in the US won’t do genital reassignment surgery on anyone under 18
That is laughably untrue. They do sex assignment surgery on infants who are born with ambiguous genitalia. I personally know kids who have had the procedure. There is no fundamental difference between assignment and reassignment. It is not an issue for medical ethicists since it is already a standard practice.
If only this discussion were about the incredibly rare condition of being born intersex.
the XYs with girl parts but no ovaries are fascinating
TMI
The way this law is interpreted in Washington, is that if a minor can find the ‘right’ physician, that provider may declare that minor a “Mature Minor”, at that point, a minor could make a top and bottom surgery decision for xerself.
Hmm, my comment on this one seems to be lost.
Is there any actual case of a child under 18 having genital altering surgery under this article’s reasoning?
Nobody can answer your jackass question because the information is privileged.
But you are just going to ignore that they already do the surgery on infants? Again, I know a child who had the procedure shortly after birth. The medical profession can and does currently perform surgery on minors.
https://www.gendermapper.org/post/no-one-is-performing-genital-surgery-on-minors-debunked-in-5-easy-minutes
For fucks sake Mike.
Do you have any intellectual curiosity?
https://floridianpress.com/2022/09/top-florida-hospital-system-to-perform-genital-surgery-on-minor-transgender-children/
https://www.medicaldaily.com/gender-reassignment-surgery-now-available-oregon-minors-without-parental-consent-342670
This is where Mike pretends that he has all these people muted and scurries away so that he can return another day to claim “for the umpteenth time” that he is a reasonable guy calling out bullshit extremist views. Because he isn’t here for discussion, he is here to sow chaos and wage a propaganda war. For him, it is a game of volume. He will troll through comments firing off these lies, and then retreat without admitting his errors. He does this because he knows that sometimes folks will miss his posts, and his lies will stay un-refuted.
I don’t give a shit who’s muted and who’s not. I want the record to show he’s full of complete shit.
You did a wonderful job destroying him.
As usual
I know, and your posts were spot on. And that is why I keep calling out his mendacity. He will constantly pull this shit- often parachuting into threads late to “reasonably” ask for cites and the like, or in this case writing these one sentence declarations and moving on.
His game is volume. It is easier for him to make these 1-sentence declarations, than it is for you to follow up with 10 posts showing him to be full of it. His victory is that while you cleaned up the shit he put in this thread, he’ll be dropping shit in 10 or 20 others on other articles.
There are a few users that frequently post here that seem to be under the impression that other people, outside of whoever they are directly replying to, can’t read their replies or something. That’s the only explanation I can think of that would result in them posting and acting the way they do.
Or, like Overt says, they are here purely to stir the pot by being either overly autistic or just straight up dishonest.
If you are talking about me, you failed.
Well, silver lining is all the info Diane provided. But no doubt, Mike L will be back tomorrow pretending none of this happened and say the same damn thing.
I have to unmute a bunch of people to see what was said. Hopefully, it will be worth it.
OK, so read Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf’s comments. All lack of substance and ad hominems. Back on mute.
Now on to Diane’s…
Pathetic. Better to mute yourself than lie about muting others.
What a weiner.
By the way, if any of the commenters here want me (and others) to see their information and counterarguments, it would help if you acted civilly so that you don’t have me and others muting you.
No one gives a shiny shit if you mute them.
You should stop muting people and pay more attention. It would make you less stupid.
I’m not going to leave people who are rude assholes unmuted.
Remember how you spent that year trying to lure people to your shitty Quora fiefdom, Episiarch? You are such an unbelievably slimy little pathetic faggot. If Reddit and Slashdot had a love child that took human form it would be you.
I welcome anyone to read any of the comments I have written about Mike and say that I am being uncivil. All I do is call out his mendacity.
I call out how he trafficked the ivermectin hoax that rolling stone ran, and then 3 days later tries to appear reasonable by saying he’d never consider rolling stone for anything but celebrity gossip.
I call out how he parachutes into threads where people are discussing GMOs and tries to derail them into flamewars about vaccines.
I call out that he can’t even keep his story straight on those vaccines- that he’ll lie and misrepresent my positions.
I call out that he has numerous times insisted that being unvaccinated is a violation of the NAP, and when refuted, shows up a few days later to make the same argument over again.
To Mike, pointing out his own words and bad faith arguing is considered uncivil. For us to be considered civil, we need to ignore his mendacity and, you know, agree with him.
You could quit being such a snowflake and listen to people even if you feel insulted. The world, and particularly this comments section, do not exist to coddle you.
Go fuck yourself sea lion. Your constant lying is not civil. That is why you get responded to in this manner.
it would help if you acted civilly so that you don’t have me and others muting you.
Careful, you might choke to death on all that crow you are having to eat.
Is that civil?
The clear and obvious point here is, the major transgender treatment organization is essentially ratcheting the limits downward. So while there is lots of evidence that Top surgery happens in minors, and “anecdotal evidence” that bottom surgery happens in minors (which go against WPATH’s guidelines (as stated by the NIH), it’s clear that this is the road we’re going down.
I submit it’s only a matter of time (probably a couple of years) before we get to stage 3:
It’s happening, it’s as bad as you say, and that’s a good thing.
It’s clearly heading that direction.
I am quite sure that, within certain circles, we are already there.
They are pushing hard for it already.
https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1579859832425058305
Good lord. How is this subject not roundly objected to?
I could be wrong — but I bet if smoking amongst 14 year olds increased fivefold, I doubt the Left would be applauding it.
I love the boast that the demand is higher and no concern about why that is. And why it seems so focused in progressive communities.
Let’s note that this is clear and obvious evidence that the Trans crowd supports gender reassignment for minors, which supports the supposedly anecdotal evidence that this happens.
And guess who is not replying to it, even though he gave his one-liner “nuh uh!” nitpicking in several other spots.
This is what allows Mike to pretend he is being honest. He will be here next article with the same “For the umpteenth time!!” pronouncements.
Because Mike is not arguing in good faith.
And we must stop people from making free choices about their own bodies using the iron fist of the state! It’s the only libertarian way!
No, just that children should be protected from the predations of adults. Once someone is an adult, they are free to make whatever life altering medcial decision they want.
And what you’re calling predation is a child requesting gender transition and their parents consenting?
And that this obviously tenuous redefinition of “predation” is enough for you to hand over parenting responsibilities to state-level politicians?
I’m so glad we libertarians have this newfound utility for state power. I’ll be submitting my list of requests presently.
A child who is incapable of making lifetime medical decisions is not asking to transition, they are being guided by parents to do so.
This is the problem. You are ascribing a cognitive ability on children they don’t have and an altruistic attitude on parents they don’t always have. That’s why there are laws to protect children.
I don’t know that much about trans people or what it’s like to be trans, and neither do you. But between the two of us, I’m not endorsing sending state goons in to hurt people to confirm my knee-jerk opinions about something I don’t understand.
I haven’t even made an argument on the substance, which is apparently whether being trans is harmful in and of itself. As a gay man, though, I have heard arguments along those lines.
They’re always peddled by religious nuts who have no business anywhere near the levers of power.
I’m simply arguing to protect kids from permanent medical disfigurement they can’t remotely comprehend by adults engaging in what amounts to a modern day, pseudo-intellectual fad.
They’re already protected from that by medical guidelines. Do you not believe that the doctors can be trusted with medical ethics? Or at least more trusted about medical ethics than politicians?
Eh, when I see doctors talking about the financial boon that gender reassignment surgery and gender affirming care will create, I tend to be skeptical. Especially when the science does not support them.
So, I have to pick trust. On one hand you don’t mutilate kids, on the other hand you do mutilate kids and cross your fingers hoping that they won’t regret it all while they have to constantly be medically treated to make sure the mutilation doesn’t result in more life threatening complications for the rest of the person’s life.
But politicians ranting about trans people near election day… they just have our precious kids’ safety at heart.
And when they cut childcare monies to give to billionaires as tax cuts, it’s for their own good.
It’s funny how you claim to be this intellectual, yet all of your positions are based on propaganda canards about the issues and those you disagree with. All you do is create false worlds and people to argue against in a weird straw man format. You never address actual issues, you address issues that you create in your head.
I don’t understand such cognitive dissonance. Is it just easier to make up how the world is and feel righteous railing against your false creation than actually understanding the world and reality?
Again, Tony was on board with forcing kids to wear masks in schools and get the vaccine, even though its was thoroughly unneeded.
But cutting up a kid’s body? No biggie. No harm, no foul.
There is no cutting up of kid’s bodies. You’re saying that because if you said “psychological care and perhaps hormone therapy,” it wouldn’t sound so scary.
Do you intend to engage this argument in good faith or do you just want to help Republicans make people stupid enough to vote for them in time for election day?
Excess testosterone in MEN can cause significant health problems. I bet we have lots of long-term studies of its impact on women.
We let people smoke cigarettes dude.
I was unaware anybody pretended smoking was a cure for much of anything nor much of a good idea to pursue.
Are you saying that trans bullshit is on the same level as smoking?
I’m saying it’s none of my business or yours unless you plan to participate.
But if I sell cigarettes to a seven year old? That is OK because they made their own decision?
Within a decade’s time, there will be a concerted movement to allow a psychiatrist, upon determining a patient presents as the “wrong” gender, to involuntarily commit that patient to gender reassignment—even in the face of that patient’s protests to the contrary. And it will be pushed on children, the argument being that they don’t possess the agency to make such a weighty determination for themselves.
That already happens in Iran.
More detail on the WPATH guidelines for transgender surgery for minors.
World? I specifically said “US”.
I have read every one of your comments that were supposedly showing the error of my claim that US doctors won’t do genital altering surgery on someone under 18, and my claim still stands.
You previously quoted wpath to prove. O minor surgeries you dishonest shit.
How do you continue to lie about this? You even cited a year old WPATH guidance despite them changing it as recommended last month.
Who the fuck do you think you are gaslighting? There are fucking videos out there of minor patients.
Honestly, shut the fuck up w the lies Mike.
Well if no one’s doing it then there’s no problem with outlawing it is there?
“Well if no one’s doing it then there’s no problem with outlawing it is there?”
More libertarian pearls of wisdom.
Total bullshit. It has been happening.
Chloe Cole, speaking about “gender affirming care”.
I like how trans activists are starting to go after the people who’ve talked about their detransition, suggesting they’re being “manipulated” etc. Riiight, NOOOW they’re being manipulated.
The 17 year old who made a life altering decision they forever regret was not being manipulated at all. Nope. They were just manipulated into regretting it later when they were older, because people get less wise when they get older or something.
This is the most evil thing I have ever witnessed. I can’t fucking believe society has gotten this depraved.
It makes some sense if you consider that detransitioners are a tiny minority, and the the majority of people really benefit from medical transitions. The thousands of people who benefitted from medical transition are naturally worried that there is this army of unstable bigots who are trying to get the procedure that helped them banned by using anecdotal evidence of a small minority of detransitioners.
Imagine if there was some movement of New Age alternative medicine people who opposed appendectomies and constantly cited horror studies about people who suffered horrible complications from having appendectomies, and claimed that ruptured appendixes are often survivable. If you were one of the many people whose life or health was saved by the procedure, you would be pretty angry, wouldn’t you? You might be tempted to say that those people are being manipulated to dismiss them.
The situation with gender affirming care is roughly analogous. The best way to increase recognition and sympathy for detransitioners is for people like you to stop using them as props in your mad quest to deny health care to trans people.
No. They don’t. Stop pushing the bullshit studies that have ready been torn apart.
Instead of debating these people they should be swept aside and there plans eliminated. Then we can figure out how they should be dealt with.
First sentence is an egregious lie.
Over 90% either de-transition back, or suicide.
The detransitioners are apostates to the Woke pseudo religion. No one leaves their True Faith without being insane or under the influence of evildoers.
They are infidels and must be figuratively beheaded
They would be literally castrated if they hadn’t been already.
You’re right, it is stupid. It is entirely possible to believe the following things:
1. Most people who want to transition are not mistaken.
2. Most people who want to transition will benefit greatly from doing so.
3. Some minority of people who want to transition are mistaken, and will regret doing so.
It is not necessary to assume that the people who have detransitioned are in any way misled or manipulated. Medical transition is just like any medical procedure. The majority of the time it is really beneficial and good for the people who undergo it. But all procedures carry risk, and there is a small chance a procedure might go wrong or turn out to be unnecessary.
That is the honest way to go about things. But I can kind of understand why some people give in to dishonesty. There are a lot of bigots out there who will seize on the anecdotal evidence of detransitioning people and use it to try to paint medical transitioning as a whole in a bad light, even though the science does not support that. People like you, in other words. Maybe if people like you just stopped, people would be more willing to have reasonable discussions about balancing the risks and rewards of the procedures.
Yeah, but remember the time you got banned from Reason.com using your Sarah Palin’s buttplug account because you posted dark web links to hardcore child pornographer, shreek?
Lies.
Over 90% either de-transition or suicide.
“And it would be in the same category as intentionally causing “a physical injury to a child that seriously impairs the child’s health or physical well-being…”
So exactly where it should be, then.
No, not quite. Those injuries are not necessarily permanent, unlike puberty blockers and genital mutilation.
True, but the quoted law doesn’t specify permanence, just serious impairment. I don’t think anyone sane would object if Michigan wanted to add a more serious category of child abuse for injuries which are also permanent, but apparently there isn’t one now.
Yes, there is one, now, for permanent injuries from puberty blockers and genital mutilation.
Destroying an otherwise physically healthy teenager’s primary and secondary sexual characteristics, putting them on hormone therapy for the rest of their lives to treat a mental and emotional condition is HEALTHCARE, obviously.
Whatever it is, it is profitable for both the drug companies and the doctors and hospitals who do it. And that is what this is all about, money. Remember how the left claims to hate profits and corporations? Well, they are now willing to mutilate children so those same corporations can make money.
It could be worse. At least we aren’t being governed by fascists.
What the fuck business it is of yours what complete strangers do to their own bodies?
You people find new ways to use the government to punish people for their free choices every day lately. Where might I go to talk to libertarians?
Children, Tony. You don’t seem able to make this distinction.
Children making free choices and parents affirming those free choices with free choices of their own, none of it resulting in harm to anyone…
…unless you define harm as offending your own cultural and religious sensibilities. In which case, fuck off slaver.
Children making free choices and parents affirming those free choices with free choices of their own, none of it resulting in harm to anyone…
And one day in the near future when you’re in court answering to charges of sexually assaulting a child, I have no doubt that’s precisely the argument you’ll make to the court.
Oh I never go near children if I can possibly help it.
Not being allowed within 1,000 feet of a school aids in that effort, no doubt.
Do you people never wake up and think, hmm, ever since I started worshiping Donald Trump on Facebook, I’m calling everyone I disagree with a pedophile. Perhaps there’s something wrong with me. Perhaps I should seek psychiatric help?
It probably has more to do with the left’s obsession with children and their sexual desires and proclivities.
But no, it’s surely always the evil orange man.
The only people in politics who ever bring up sex with children are Trump worshipers. They talk about it all the freaking time.
Normal people know that when religious conservatives go on and on about sexual immorality, they’re projecting. Normal people understand perfectly well that many deviants hide their deviancy with the loudest piety.
So the only question is what proportion of Republicans are pedophiles. I mean besides the ones who’ve been caught after serving as speaker of the House and such.
Yeah, it’s definitely people on the right who are all about sex, gender, and talking with kids about it. Please. When you have to lie to protect your team, it may be time to reassess the position of your team.
The longest-serving Republican speaker of the House is a convicted child molester. Name me one evangelical preacher who wasn’t at least an adulterer. If you don’t know that moralists are often the biggest hypocrites, you haven’t spent much time in this species.
Then there are the pure stupids who think that the way to predate on children is to dress up in drag and go to a public library. You can tell me, is the entire Republican party literally nothing but a giant cover for a pedophile ring?
This may be the dumbest comment you have made yet.
How can people like you argue for and defend constant interaction with children about their sex, who they want to have sex with, and how they want to express their sexuality and be like, “damn, those Repubs are really focused on kids and sex?” I mean, the disingenuousness is off the charts.
And then you bring up religious issues again. I don’t know what happened to you in the past, but you are seriously broken on this matter and should probable seek counseling.
But that said, no one argued that what pedophile priests did was right. Yet, the left continually argues that teachers talking about sex with kids and not telling parents is okay. It’s the left that celebrates children being present at racy pride parades, drag shows, and strip shows. It’s the left that is infatuated with kids and their genitalia.
And only when people on the right go, “hey, maybe let kids be kids and stop sexualizing them” do people like you go, “see, it’s the right sexualizing kids!” It’s like you know what you believe is wrong, but you pull out whataboutisms and false claims to deflect from what you know is wrong.
I mean, is there a point where your positions become so blindingly disingenuous that you just can’t keep asserting them?
Did you now just call me a slaver because I understand that children don’t posses the cognitive abilities to make lifetime body altering medical decisions?
And you’re ascribing religious motivations to me simply because I don’t want children to be permanently harmed?
Dude. I don’t even know what’s wrong with you at this point.
A trans child who is forbidden (by the state) from transitioning before puberty might insist that the state is forcing upon them bodily changes they expressly don’t want.
Can’t you see that none of this is improved by getting the state involved? You don’t even have an example of a crime, let alone a pattern that would establish the need for state intervention. You’re just trying to use the state to prevent trans people from existing.
Getting the state involved to protect children is a good thing, no matter how much you want to claim otherwise. Next step is literally supporting adults having sex with kids because hey, what right does the state have in protecting children who decide to sleep with adults.
“Next step is literally supporting adults having sex with kids because hey, what right does the state have in protecting children who decide to sleep with adults.”
That’s the endgame. It’s been incremental—people have to be eased into accepting this stuff gradually, you see—but since they’re now openly advocating surgically butchering children, mainstreaming pedophilia can’t be too far off.
And now we’re going full QAnon. But you insist this isn’t about religion or Republicans.
I have just argued that what’s harmful to trans children is to deny them care. That’s what most trans children would say; I guarantee it.
How about we just throw all parents in prison and they can try and talk their way out? Wouldn’t that be perfectly libertarian, since we’re so very concerned about the poor children?
You’re insisting that children have the agency to consent to surgical mutilation when they believe their physical bodies don’t conform to their “gender identity.” Are you really going to tell us you don’t believe those same children have the agency to consent to sex with adults, maybe so long as they get a thumbs-up from some forward-thinking psychiatrist?
Children don’t get surgeries dude. And it’s not like a child can decide one day to transition and go find another child to help them cut their dick off. These are all conversations that happen over years with parents and medical professionals.
Why you want to invite politicians to those conversations is the question.
“Children don’t get surgeries dude.”
The jury seems to be out on whether kids get bottom surgery, but it’s been reliably established that they have received, and in some places continue to receive, top surgery.
But if you wanna throw in one more increment, then fine.
You clearly believe that children should be allowed to receive puberty blockers and top surgery, so it won’t be much of a leap for you to start advocating for their right to receive bottom surgery. And from there, it’s just one more small step to complete sexual liberation for children.
Really the only thing left to wonder is how young you’d go.
Funny how you are a devout conspiracy theorist accusing others of asserting conspiracies. You are the king of irony.
I don’t have an opinion on the matter, as I’m leaving that up to the individuals and their doctors.
It’s like pulling teeth to get libertarians to deign to allow other people to have medical freedom over their own lives. Sheesus.
Except the individuals are kids and are not able to make hugely medical life altering decisions. This is the part you keep conveniently leaving out.
Their own lives, yes. Children, no.
People should at least serve some jail time for the mainstream proliferation of the nose-ring.
I second that emotion.
As a good faith, both-sides-libertarian, I can only go so far as ticketing nostril studs, misdemeanors for nostril rings, and felonies for septum and bridge piercings of any type.
Think about how much money some plastic surgeons are going to make in the near future undoing all the damage caused by ear gauges.
Maybe they can plug the ear holes with tissue from your penis and kill two birds with one stone.
While my penis is indeed robust I doubt it is enough to go around.
Edit: Also, I am literally quite attached to it just the way it is.
Would you get an ear-ection?
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Oo-mox
As a minor, I had to have tympanoplasty as the result of chronic ear infections. Your privileged comments about regulating restorative plastic ear surgery might seem funny to you, but it’s disgustingly offensive to those of us who’s fundamental human right to good hearing is being threatened.
And if you’re laughing at the phrase ‘plastic ear surgery’ with a picture of Mr. Potato Head in your mind, that just shows how deeply bigoted and callously inhuman you are.
Your surgery restored normal structure. Trans destroys normal look and function.
Can I take a good look at your body and decide what I think is normal? Can I then punish you for any deviation?
What kind of punishment? Do you have whips, handcuffs, nipple clamps?
Whatever floats your boat, but we’ll need to do that inspection first. I warn you, my standards are pretty high.
You say that like a typical abortion, treatment for MS, and ectopic pregnancies are distinct medical conditions that have virtually no logical or medical connection to each other beyond uteruses and estrogen. Bigot! Your privilege does not trump my lived experience!
I saw the violence just done to you. Do you need some time in the puppy room?
If I identify as a crack addict, can I get some crack addict affirming care?
I identify as sarc… I will take tyrconnel Madeira cask finish for treatment
Sounds like a sound medical treatment to me.
Hunter, is that you?
No, but everytime Biden speaks I feel the uncontrollable urge to call up a hooker to do some crack with – so I understand where Hunter is coming from.
“Michigan Bill Could Mean Life in Prison for Parents or Docs Who Allow Gender Transition Treatment for Minors”
Any other good news today?
[OK?]
Medical transition for minors shouldn’t be a first resort, a second resort or even a last resort.
We don’t know enough about the long term consequences and we ought not to be performing medical experiments on human children.
If you want to have a discussion about whether the penalty here is excessive, we can have that discussion.
If the argument is that we should allow medical experiments to be performed on children, no, just no.
Some states will put you in prison for YEARS for beating your dog.
If you accept the premise that the state should have authority to step in when parenting is being conducted in a reprehensible manner (I do not accept that premise but for sake of argument), then mutilating your own children and ruining them for life counts.
Some states will put you in prison for YEARS for beating your dog.
And you don’t even want to get into the “last resort vs. second-to-last resort” discussion on this topic even with many metaphorically-evangelical libertarians.
What if both parents and children decide that no mutilation has occurred, and everyone’s happy with all the decisions they made?
Still throw them all into prison forever or no?
Now do pedophile polygamists.
Why don’t you tell me what you want the state to do to trans adults once we’re past this obvious charade of concern for the welfare of children.
You’ve asked me that before. My answer is the same: nothing.
I’ve heard of stories of girls who took puberty blockers not because they were trans but because they wanted to get taller. They ended up up with osteoporosis and brittle teeth in their 20s!
Yeah, it’s an plainly unscientific falsehood that gets passed around the scientific community that the puberty blockers simply suspend puberty and nothing else happens.
If the sex-change industry were selling firearms or drugs of abuse or birth control or hormone replacement therapy they’d be shut down with all the ferocity the FBI could muster. Guns to minors with parents consent?!?! OTC birth control with nothing but parent consent?!?!? PEDs to minors with nothing but parent consent?!?!? But, because they’ve fashion-hungry retards like Reason entranced, they can literally, knowingly lie to and torture kids with impunity.
Good.
Like other woke left wingers, ENB is now defending and promoting the mutilation of children.
I don’t recall any respected libertarian who has ever promoted or defended the mutilation of innocent children.
I still don’t.
Did you miss the circumcision debates?
Also, please. All kinds of bills get introduced that will never pass.
This one will not pass.
Child mutilators should be beaten to death with the organs they severed, but I’m willing to accept life in prison.
My preferred method would just be to make it something that people can sue over later on if the medical professionals and parents were wrong. What’s that you transitioned a kid at 2 years old and they realize once their 22 and it from under their parents that you’ve fucked them up medically for life. Whelp congratulations, you can now be sued to cover their life time medical costs along with emotional costs of having to deal with this shit and a penalty on top to make sure they’re actually compensated for the amount of damage you’ve done.
Medicine will adjust quickly if the cost is put on their doorstep instead of the victims.
20 years is too long an adjustment.
Twenty years is a long time, but when dealing with people who can’t grant meaningful consent until decades later, it’s something the law has to take into account. Thankfully unlike most crimes, there is no question that the surgery occurred and the medication was prescribed, so the issue of people not remembering events clearly and evidence disappearing isn’t in play. It happened, and everyone involved agreed it happened.
And, assuming we aren’t talking about a federal law, it’s not too far removed from existing or underlying law/rationale. (My numbers may be off slightly but,) only something like 13 states have a SOL of 10 yrs. for felony sex crimes. The rest have 11-20 or higher (including no limitations).
It should also be noted that disagreement with this argument is exceedingly pro-grooming as lots of people who are trans were sexually abused as children and you’re effectively saying the law shouldn’t allow transpersons to legally pursue their abusers 10, 20, or 30 yrs. or more after the fact, even if they’ve got scars and signed affidavits that their rape/abuse occurred.
Like your gonna get payback from these losers. Your mother signed you up for this with the bestest of intentions.
Mom, probably not. The many medical professionals involved and the hospital, yes. They’ve got cash, and medical malpractice has been a thing for ages.
Note that much of this is driven by the fact that no consumer of the medical care really directly pays for it. It is a bunch of shit worked out between insurance companies and the doctor/hospital. Sometimes it is paid for by Rich Daddy Wall Street at the behest of his 28 year old trophy wife and her personal Social Justice Project boy, named Hyacinth.
My preferred method would just be to make it something that people can sue over later on if the medical professionals and parents were wrong.
Why not both? Make it illegal to mutilate children AND sue the practitioners and institutions pushing this into bankruptcy.
Less room for sob stories and outrageous results when every enforcement if the law is done by someone actively harmed by the defendents.
And would you do the same for the adult who rapes a child? Make the child wait until adulthood?
I think you’re misinterpretting the notion. Most libertarians agree with the precepts of criminal law, if someone assaults someone, sexually or other, minor or other, the government should pursue and prosecute them. I think he’s focused on the part libertarians usually make hash with: who should pay. Further, I think he’s suggesting an statute of limitations, so that we don’t wind up with 50 yr. old neurotic women accusing people of sexual assault 30 yrs. after the fact, not a narrow sliver of no standing/moot point time.
The measure—H.B. 6454—amends the state’s child abuse statute to define such actions as child abuse in the first degree.
Honestly, I can’t find it in myself to be particularly bothered by this. Do I consider “gender reassignment” of children child abuse? Yes. Do I think the state of Michigan has the legitimate authority to decide upon appropriate punishments, consistent with local values and norms? I think life in prison is a little harsh, but yeah, they do. Do I consider subjecting a child to what are necessarily lasting and permanent physical procedures more grievous an offense than abandonment (which can include letting the kid go out and play, unsupervised or going to the store while leaving the child at home) or causing the child to miss a couple of meals? Well, yeah. If you accept these premises, nothing here is particularly out of line.
I get it. ENB doesn’t consider castrating a little boy or giving a little girl a mastectomy abuse. I do. If you’re going to try to claim that the fact that the child think’s he or she is of the opposite sex constitutes consent, tell me you wouldn’t have an objection to a parent who threw their kid off a third story rooftop because the child thought he was Superman.
nope. minors are minors. try changing what a minor is first and good luck w/that
It’s happened in my lifetime. Minors went from 20 to 17 in 1968. I wouldn’t rule out it happening again.
They also snuck/folded a lot of stuff in under the ‘minor’ umbrella between now and then. Pretty much everyone posting around here should remember when it was mandated, for everyone, that the age of a dependent be raised 26, even if they had their own insurance coverage for, uh *checks notes*, insurance purposes.
not certain Americans will stoop to France levels on who’s a minor. equal chance you’re correct though
And as minors they are in the custodianship of their parents.
Why do almost all of you so-called libertarians think that responsibility should be handed over to the government instead?
So if parents want to chop off their arms that would be okay with you Tony?
Did the child request it?
So, as long as a child, with minimally formed frontal cortex decides it’s okay, we’re good?
Many kids want to be dinosaurs. Is that the standard now?
These are perhaps interesting questions for a libertarian, since complicated things like consent and the existence of children come into play. If someone requests to have his arm removed and someone removes it, is it any of the state’s business?
So make one party a child and it becomes the state’s business because prefrontal cortex? All of a sudden we’re on the path to serfdom and it only took acknowledging that children exist.
I’ve tried to make this point to you people countless times. What did it take for you to realize the utility of using state power to enforce your views about how people should live their lives? I’m genuinely curious. Was it the taste of raw power that Trump gave you?
Question, do you actively create broad assumptions and claims about people so as to avoid actual subjects. I mean, your straw manning is some of the most prevalent on here, and that’s saying something.
You paint with broad brushes, you engage in countless fallacies, to disingenuously frame just about every subject you engage in, you continue this weird progressive feigned ignorance that is all the rage on the left anymore, and you create simplistic or false context in order to drive discussion away from the substance.
You are clearly smart, but you engage in the most deceitful, contradictory, and bad faith arguments out of anyone here. And again, that is saying something.
The question “Should the state punish people for X” can be answered in different ways depending on your premises.
If you’re a libertarian, you should be last in line to say “yes” on just about anything, right? Yet here I am, a serfdom-loving progressive constantly saying no, the state shouldn’t be involved, to a bunch of supposed libertarians who can barely get through their morning coffee without discovering a brand new way to employ state violence.
I don’t think my point of view here is that hard to understand. What’s hard to understand is why people who are for small government keep explaining all the creative reasons for which they want to throw people into cages.
Yes, I get your incessant need to paint everyone as libertarians here and then lecture them about how they aren’t good libertarians.
The flip side is that everyone here is not a libertarian (me included) and that there are many dimensions and beliefs within those that are libertarians. So, it’s disingenuous and improper to do what you do by ascribing your vision of what everyone you believe to be a libertarian should believe and then argue against that. It’s simply fallacious grandstanding.
Additionally, you are a radical progressive who advocates for state intervention into just about every aspect of life, yet you draw this particular line in the sand. A line that you would not draw if such aspects included things like conversion therapy or parent involvement in school curriculum. Thus, when your whole political ideology is the state should run everything (and throw you into cages when you don’t comply), yet righteously mock on this particular issue, it rings hollow.
Moreover, instead of stating your position to the argument, you play this “we libertarians should believe” garbage that immediately shows your disingenuous and simplistic condescending approach to the matter.
Instead of constantly being massively butthurt and insecure that people have other ideologies than you, simply make reasoned and genuine arguments to support your position.
Excuse the shit out of me for making libertarian arguments at Reason. Sorry, I’ll go find the actual libertarian publication since this place apparently became Hysterical Busybodies for Christ while I was sleeping.
I do not advocate for excessive state intervention. I just believe in taxing excess wealth and subsidizing some basic human necessities. Is there room in libertarianism for that? Oh no? That crosses some kind of line that inserting legislatures between patients and doctors for obviously maniacal reasons does not?
Maybe libertarianism is fucked and I was right about it all along.
So, now you’re the victim for being called out for your bad faith description of who a libertarian is and your blanket ascription that everyone here fits that bad faith description?
Dude, give the butthurt and anger a rest.
No one here is spouting Jesus nonsense or arguing from religious moralisms. Heck, one of the reasons I love reading the comments here is that religion almost never plays a role in the arguments that people make. It’s your own inherent view that evil Christians are right around every corner that is skewing your perceptions here.
So the libertarian thing is to argue in favor of enforcing religious sexual morality without even realizing that’s what it’s doing? Are you speaking for all libertarians when you’re calling them even dumber than the Christ warriors?
Why can’t transitioning be left to people and their doctors? Why does the state need to get involved? Your excuse must be because you believe that you know better than trans people and their doctors what’s good for them. The same old terrible motivation anyone on a libertarian board should be utterly inoculated against.
Of course this is about religion. All these same conversations happened about gay people until you got used to us. Do you think sexual liberation ended in 2012? Might there be more freedoms to win and more assumptions to challenge? Or is now the time to use the full force of the state to clamp down on freedom, because there’s simply too much of it out there now?
It can be left to adults just fine. Children are a different matter. I don’t know how you can’t make that distinction.
Well it’s difficult then, because people who are “allowed” to transition before puberty avoid having some of the sex-related traits that are so difficult to get rid of later.
I don’t believe you care more about the welfare of children than I do. You’d happily let a child starve to death for the crime of being born to poor parents. That’s just the market speaking.
You won’t stop at children. Every anti-trans meme refers to a trans adult. Jordan Peterson is ranting about trans adults. The actual Nazis started with trans adults. Do you know you’re a fascist or are you being led ignorantly into it by obviously horseshit excuses like “but think of the children”?
It’s just that this was obviously horseshit to you people not so long ago.
Holy shit. And now back into more Tony conspiracy theories. And this time you invoked Nazis too! Godwin would be so proud.
The reason you know so little about trans people is because the fascists burned trans research centers to the ground.
Most of your provincial assumptions about gender norms result from Christianity brutally suppressing knowledge about alternatives for centuries.
One of the most difficult and fascinating ways to expand your mind is to learn how so very many of your cultural assumptions are totally arbitrary and the result of deep, longstanding coercive power. The true diversity of human experience stamped out by religion and fascism will never be appreciated in its fullness.
Whoa. Apparently we’re just diving deeper into your psychosis and conspiracy laden mind.
If the child requested to have sex with a parent should that be allowed?
I’ve seen libertarians advocate worse.
I’m just approaching this as a libertarian. You all seem to have it in your heads that the way to run a society is for everyone to ask permission from the state before they do anything. “Be allowed.” Did Trump do this to you?
Yet, that’s not at all the positions that people are taking. This is just a disingenuous straw man. That is your calling card, though.
Of course not. The state should definitely still stay out of regulating carbon emissions or guns or unchecked wealth, things that actually hurt people, the better to focus on all those things that offend Jesus.
Wow. You are so broken.
Good!
As it should be you cunt
Here is my problem with these articles that Reason is finally trying to put out there: They are all a bunch of process complaints.
Reason is supposed to be the flagship of Libertarian thought. But they won’t touch the actual issue with a ten foot pole. Is it moral for a parent to put their child through life-altering medical procedures? Under what conditions should it be or not be moral? What if the procedure could be deferred until the child is of a later stage?
But ENB doesn’t want to have that conversation. So instead she cherry picks studies that suggest maybe transitioning early isn’t so bad. And cherry picks candidate legislation that may go overboard in trying to prevent transitioning. That was she doesn’t actually have to reckon with a morally dubious practice that her Tribe supports. Instead she can just claim that critics are unreasonably persecuting people.
I will happily have a conversation about what role the state ought to take in preventing immoral things like fraud, child abuse, or murder or theft. I think it is a real concern that a government trying to prevent harms becomes far more harmful and intrusive (especially when it comes to interfering with children and parents). But first we are going to have to agree whether or not the behavior is immoral. Otherwise, you are being disingenuous with your “process” complaints.
The process of a mastectomy for your 14 yr old is the punishment.
I think the point is that libertarians should be the very last group of people calling for government to be making these decisions for us–even to the extent of throwing people in prison for making choices that harm nobody but (allegedly) themselves.
Are we not allowed to harm ourselves in libertopia? Are we not allowed to define for ourselves what harm to ourselves is?
Y’all have have lost the thread. You’re supposed to be OK with people making decisions for themselves and their children that make you uncomfortable. If you’re not last in line to be sending the fucking cops to police people’s private decisions, you’re doing libertarianism wrong.
“Are we not allowed to harm ourselves in libertopia? Are we not allowed to define for ourselves what harm to ourselves is?”
Nobody is interfering with your ability to harm yourself, Tony. You are (ostensibly) an adult.
The question is what happens with children. I am on the record in many places stating that parents hold their children’s rights in trust, just as the trustee of your (ostensible) estate would do if you become mentally incapacitated or dead.
Holding rights in trust does not allow you to make any and every decision you want. One cannot say “Adults should be allowed to commit suicide, so since they are the trust holder, parents should be able to kill their kid.” That is because holding rights in trust comes with a fiduciary responsibility.
So we are at exactly the point I was exploring: at what point is it parental abuse of trust to subject the child to a life altering medical procedure? Your simplistic response would seem to justify things such as sexual molestation and potentially killing the child.
So put away your simplistic little retorts and get back down to the matter at hand. At what point do we determine an abuse of trust?
I’m not suggesting it’s not a complex question. I’m suggesting that as libertarians we should be the very last people sending state goons to enforce our knee-jerk opinions about other people’s parenting, especially when the issue is complex (unlike, say, the starving of a child).
A case could be made that a parent denying their child access to transition procedures could constitute child abuse.
But generally I’m content not enforcing our own private morality on other people’s private bodily decisions. It’s kind of a constant with me. I wish it were the same for the “small government” people.
Yet, you’re not a libertarian and fully support sending goons to enforce massive state control over the populace.
Not as much as libertarians, apparently.
Wow. Just, wow.
The state should send parents of trans people to prison for supporting their children and force Twitter to publish neo-Nazi speech against its will, and let’s add force women to give birth to their rapist babies against their will.
All perfectly libertarian. But if you raise Charles Koch’s taxes by a single fucking cent, then we have a problem.
Yawn. It’s crazy how easily you resort to canards and propaganda about your political opponents all while lecturing your political opponents to think beyond simplistic propagandistic positioning.
I will never understand the idea of fighting against that which I dislike by becoming that which I dislike.
You don’t understand being a libertarian who can barely open his mouth without finding an excuse to send people to prison for dubious reasons?
More canards.
Libertarianism is not anarchism.
“A case could be made that a parent denying their child access to transition procedures could constitute child abuse.”
No one is suggesting that a parent should avoid treating a child. Only that they should err against permanent medical intervention for a condition that has a long, long documented history of being transitory. But this is the standard MO of the pro-trans side, it seems:
1) It isn’t happening
2) If it is happening it is a good thing
3) And even if it isn’t a good thing, it is reversible.
4) And even if it isn’t reversible, parents just have to do SOMETHING for their poor gender dysphoric children, so leave them alone.
Every one of these is a lie. And it is especially noteworthy that the people trying to appeal to liberty are folks like Tony, who on any other given day would be arguing that the state should interfere if (for example) a parent were to put their kid in Conversion Therapy.
Michigan Bill Could Mean Life in Prison for Parents or Docs Who Allow Gender Transition Treatment for Minors
GOOD. These people are abusing children.
And by “abuse” I don’t mean gross sexual touching, but actual physical and mental harm. They break these children and turn them into freaks, who become suicidal.
I deeply question the integrity and morality of anyone who thinks any of this is ok.
How many parents do you suppose are jumping at the opportunity to transition their children?
Can you possibly think through your logic just a little before having an opinion about something?
No trans child or parent of a trans child solicited your thoughts on their private lives and choices.
No take this same argument and apply it to parents getting to decide what kind of education their kids receive. Does that work for you?
I’m not the one being a hypocrite because I do not have a hard-and-fast rule about how much freedom people should have. I come into any conversation needing to know the particulars.
If you think parents should be free to fill their children’s heads with ancient fairy tales that will make them incapable of competing in the marketplace, then why all of a sudden do you care if they pay for their elective medical procedures?
Ah, so you’re not being a hypocrite because you are simply being hypocritical to point out to others the beliefs you have imputed on them as being hypocritical. Yeah, that computes.
I’m just arguing against using the state to enforce extremely poorly informed opinions about how other people should live their private lives.
You’re arguing for children to be permanently medically altered by fad seeking adults.
No, I’m arguing for not having the state decide for them.
Yet, you support universal healthcare, so you inevitably are arguing for that.
Yes, I support state subsidy for universal healthcare, but when patients seek healthcare their decisions should be between them and their doctors.
You’re the one insisting that state legislatures are better at deciding what medical treatments we should be “allowed” than doctors and medical organizations. That’s what your every post is insisting upon.
Wait, you think state supported healthcare will result in no government involvement and requirements?
I’m actually all for universal healthcare, but at least I understand the consequences of it.
I’m sure there are decisions to be made about how much in the way of public resources go to which procedures, but I’d err on the generous side because we seem to have so much excess wealth just sitting in yachts.
Totally, all those evil yacht owners! And those people who go on vacations! And don’t get me started on people who own cars!!!
I love when people’s poltical philosophies are all predicated on hate, retribution, payback, animosity, emotional instability, jealousy, and insecurity.
Good on the Michigan legislature. I support the bill wholeheartedly. I also plan to vote no on Prop3.
Hope this bill passes and knowing that Witchmer will veto the bill but hopefully enough members in the congress will over ride her veto.
Good bye Witchmer and take your little drunken lesbian Attorney general with you.
You’re the son that I cherish, so sparkling and bright
You were touched by the holy and beautiful light
But then you were butchered by Dr. N Wright
Like angels that sing, a heavenly thing
Now you’re daddy’s little girl!
The arguments concerning an anti-circumcision bill are going to be great fun. Some slack-jaws will actually argue that childish, silly, obsolete superstition excuses child abuse.
circumsision actually has the effect of decreasing chances of STDs. And it does no harm
My parents where atheists and had me circumsized.
And gender transition decreases the chance of suicide.
Actually, it doesn’t.
Maybe throwing their parents in prison will help.
It may. Not my desired solution, but the problem does need to be addressed.
Ever consider using the marketplace of ideas before immediately running to the nearest legislature? There are experts in this field, after all.
Or do you want to make sure to pass all your laws before they’re able to weigh in?
I love the marketplace of ideas. The left doesn’t, but I do. I also like protecting kids from pseudo-intellectual fads that permanently medically scar them. So yeah, let’s keep the status quo while we work this out in the marketplace of ideas. Oh, and let’s make sure the marketplace allows all ideas to be expressed.
Be clear: you like using state violence to “protect” kids from “fads.”
Do medical authorities think transgenderism is a fad? Have you even read a single scientific source on the matter?
It’s at least possible that the sexual liberation of the 20th century has led to people finding all sorts of new identities that may have been bubbling under the surface of strictly enforced sexual roles for centuries.
But you don’t want to read anything or think about anything. You just want the state to enforce your immediate, knee-jerk feeling, no matter how many experts would disagree.
Throwing people into prison harms them too, you know. Libertarians used to know that.
Actually, I have read quite a bit on the matter. There is exceptional disagreement in the medical community about transgenderism. There is agreed upon gender-dysphoria as a psychological condition, which is also very rare. And it’s not even clear that “gender-affirming care” is remotely helpful to people who actually suffer this condition.
And no, there wasn’t some big sexual liberation that finally allowed humans to express behaviors that were stymied over the course of human history, especially since such behavior requires massive intervention by modern medical technology. It’s simply a modern day fad.
Man. I can’t believe that I am actually arguing that we shouldn’t allow adults to mutilate the genitalia of children. It’s so depressing.
Children do not get bottom surgery. You’re using this hysterical straw man so you don’t have to defend using state violence to enforce your bigoted horseshit. So forget genitals. What about hormones? Should the state throw parents into prison if their children get hormones?
Why can’t I argue that the parents of trans children should be thrown into prison for denying their children hormones?
Yet it’s not a straw man.
You can definitely learn a lot about someone’s position when they have to constantly obfuscate, falsely contextualize, and deflect in order to justify it. You do that in spades.
There’s no no difference in the suicide rate between pre and post op.
What about before and after the state sends their parents to prison?
Suicidality is complex, transgenderism is a relatively novel public concept, and I don’t expect much good science to exist on the subject, so let’s not hinge whether we decide to throw people into cages on a couple shaky studies, shall we?
Mutilating children should be a serious crime
Perhaps we should ask children who request hormone therapy whether they feel they’re being mutilated. Words are dangerous things in the hands of the stupid.
I hereby redefine “mutilation” as “taking to church.” There, now run along to prison.
Since mutilation of a perfectly health body and taking someone to church aren’t remotely the same thing, only someone engaging in disingenuous arguments would resort to such fallacy.
You really can’t debate without being false and disingenuous can you?
It’s not his fault, his hatred and bigotry have warped his fragile little mind.
You’re right. Taking a child to church does far more harm than hormone therapy.
I didn’t realize you were such a scarred anti-religious nut. That explains so much.
Amazes me how scared of religion you people on the left are even though religion isn’t remotely threatening to our society anymore.
It’s this weird boogeyman you all can’t let go. And I say that as someone who hates religion, but is also not remotely scared by it.
That hardly matters. I’ve decided that taking children to church harms them. I don’t care what the experts say. I believe it, and we must therefore employ the full force of the state to punish parents who abuse their children in this way. It’s literally common sense.
Well, that does fit with your ideology.
You’re the one who’s opening the door to using state violence to enforce dubious opinions about what constitutes child abuse.
Religion has been called child abuse by better men than I for a very long time.
This trans panic is probably only in effect until election day.
Cutting off children’s genitalia isn’t a dubious opinion about what constitutes child abuse.
If you weren’t so scarred by your religious complex, you could see that.
Children can’t get bottom surgery in this country. Do you know why? because medical authorities don’t recommend it.
But you want to insert state authority above and beyond that, because obviously Representative Huck McCousindiddler knows better than medical professionals about transgender care.
Bottom surgery? You mean genital removed. I love the euphemisms you all have to use.
And not long ago top surgery and hormone blockers were not medically accepted either. Yet, here we are.
And now medical professionals are beginning to recommend bottom surgery. So, here we go.
I can’t wait for your moving of the goal post once bottom surgeries are allowed when you defend why that’s totally okay.
I don’t move goalposts, I accept what physicians recommend in their field of expertise. Guess who’s not an expert on this issue? Any Republican politician.
Does that include the nazi doctors tony?
“Bottom surgery” and subsequent “transitioning” on very young male children with genital deformities or injuries has been happening for decades. It would not be a huge reach to allow it for older boys. Stay tuned.
https://allthatsinteresting.com/david-reimer
https://www.psywww.com/intropsych/ch16-sfl/gender.html#raised
Enslaving women already is… it’s in the 13th Amendment.
Of course gender transition treatments only decrease the likelihood of distress and suicide, so what these laws are really aimed at protecting are the delicate cultural sensibilities of half-literate Christian fucktards. Please government… please protect me from having to learn new things.
It took me far too long to realize that the one thing that’s really up half the country’s ass is that the world they encountered as an adult is not exactly as it was described to them when they were children, and they’re PISSED.
Presumably even Trumpers eventually learned that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny were lies. But I don’t make that assumption lightly.
Tony likes trafficking in junk science. Who’d have guessed?
That is beside the point.
It is not for kids.
It’s funny watching you make up, out of whole cloth that conveniently fits your desired narrative, the reasons and rationales of those you disagree with.
There’s a way to solve that, you could actual learn and understand why people think and believe the way they do. But nah, right? That wouldn’t allow you to live in a righteous world where you are the smartest one around, professing on high the idiocy of the plebs.
Again, when you have to make up the argument of your opponent to win, you might not have that strong of argument.
And the fact you talk about the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause to condescend all while defending a premise that biological sex is simply an imaginary construct is blowing up the irony meters. The party of science until the science doesn’t say what you want, amirite?!
Lies. Over 90% of trans people eventually either de-transition or suicide.
“Under H.B. 6454, prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones would be treated as a more severe form of child abuse than starving or abandoning a kid.”
That is ridiculous.
It should merely be treated the same.
I try not to visit reason often anymore, because somewhere along the way I realized your staff were literal nutters. I still do come back, occasionally though. And dang if you don’t disappoint. I’m not sure that this is too lenient of a sentence.
I know this is an anecdote, but I live in flyover country, and I overheard a conversation at a local shop the other day. A woman (I presume, I mean she looked more troll than human) talking to her friend about how she and her “partner” had adopted a 3yo 2 weeks prior, and how said 3yo made them so proud by telling them that he is really trans. They were so eager to get the kid started, and start meeting with doctors to start the process. It’s hard not to look at this, and think “maybe a life sentence is too lenient.”
I thought parents all but owned their children and got to make their own judgments about them.
When do I get to throw you in prison for teaching your children the filth that is the Bible?
“I thought parents all but owned their children”
You’re the only one who thinks that.
Sockpuppet hearsay… how edifying!
If little Johnny isn’t old enough to consent to stick his penis in another person’s vagina, then he isn’t old enough to consent to having his penis turned into a vagina…
Which is why that’s not allowed for anyone under 18 in the US.
I remember the days when “but it’s for the children!” was widely recognized among libertarians as being an emotional appeal trotted out by tyrants who want the government to police our private lives.
Now nearly 100% of libertarians can’t go a day without finding a new way for the government to police our private lives.
You’re really stuck on this whole attacking your definition of libertarianism and imputing such definition on everyone here.
I mean, when you have to go into a debate, create a false argument to fight against in order for your position to work, it doesn’t show that your position is all that proper.
Is this board not filled with people practically masturbating at the thought of sending parents to prison for the crime of not treating their trans children like abominations?
If you’re as smart as you want to be, you know perfectly well that this is a movement by religious zealots to use government to enforce their freakish sexual morality on the rest of us. They’re doing it all over the place. If you think this is a legitimate, urgent public policy debate about some real problem in society, then you’re not smart.
Holy shit. You actually see a religious conspiracy in people wanting to prevent kids from being permanently medically scarred over what amounts to a modern, pseudo-intellectual fad?
That’s freaking nuts. You progressives sure know how to compete with the wacky right with your conspiracy theories.
The clue was the fact that the Republican party is all over the issue of trans people just in time for election day. What expertise does Rep. Bubba Cousinfucker in Ohio have on trans people? Do you seriously think laws such as the one discussed in this article are well motivated?
In 2004, did you also wholeheartedly believe that the big threat to the American way of life was gay marriage? They do this crap every single fucking election season. How have you not noticed it yet?
I get it. You have some serious issues with reality. No need to keep banging away at the scary Christians just lurking around every corner. Because yeah, every year, the country just gets more and more religious.
Wow.
Religion: The justification for literally every war and genocide ever.
Trans people: …. They make you feel a little oogy?
Clearly trans people are the big threat right now. Don’t forget to vote for the guy screeching most hysterically about them!
Tony’s right here, Team Red plays the scary bogeyman card every election season as an appeal to pure naked demagoguery in order to scare voters to vote for them. In 2004 it was gay marriage. In 2016 it was “illegals!!!”. Now it is transgender individuals.
Of course he won’t admit that Team Blue does the exact same fucking thing, though.
On the contrary, I wish Democrats were capable of a little populism, or at least that their voters weren’t so precious and intellectual that they have to parse every candidate’s 76-point plan before they decide to just vote for the lesser of two evils.
If there’s some brand of demagoguery that could get people to vote for nerdy technocrats, I’d love to hear it.
Of course. You don’t mind the demagoguery, you are just upset that Team Red does it better than your team.
And besides, Team Blue has its share. Did you forget “throw grandma off a cliff” during ObamaCare? How about “billionaires shouldn’t exist”? How about “vote for Democrats otherwise the world will end via climate change”? Or now, it is “vote for Democrats otherwise Republicans will destroy democracy”. That last one actually has a kernel of truth to it, but it is still an appeal to raw demagoguery.
Throw grandma off a cliff was pretty chef’s kiss. But it’s hardly equal and opposite demagoguery. I can’t name a single Republican policy proposal that’s not pure demagoguery. I mean, there’s a reason I picked one team over another, and it’s not because I preferred their mascot.
You’re right, it’s NOT “equal and opposite” demagoguery. Team Red does it better, and you’re jealous.
Nuclear annihilation is from the gop? End if democracy is from the gop?
Youre one dumb leftist jeff.
Damn, I see you two have straw man and false narratives down well. But don’t let me interfere with your precious intellectualism while you justify medically damaging children all in the name of a bizarre political adherence.
Will you just knock it off with the “but for the children” hysteria? You sound like Nancy Pelosi and every single attempt from her team to justify bloated government and insufferable regulations as long as it’s “for the children” at least in name only.
Yes they are children. Sometimes children suffer from terrible diseases. It is very sad. No sane person is happy when a child suffers needlessly. But you know what? Liberty does not die due to the existence of children. Children have parents. Parents, as a general rule, want what is best for their children. They are the ones who are most heavily invested in the welfare of their own children. No politician, no matter how sincere, can possibly have the depth of emotion or caring than a parent can have for his/her child.
And Jeff is another who really keeps his fingers crossed for the end game of fucking children.
Please jeff, explain how a 12 year old has the mental understanding of lifelong medical decisions.
I can point you to dozens of detransitioners if you want.
Watching you leftists once again care so deeply about parents and the role they play in the lives of their kids is just amazing to me.
I guess we should include a defense to child abuse laws whereby parents are exempt, because, like you said, parents always have the best interests of their kids in mind even if it goes against the parents’ desires, so they clearly can’t commit child abuse.
The amount of stupid this subject generates is appalling at this point.
The real problem here, it seems, is that most of the commenters here don’t recognize the validity of the medical condition that is being treated here. Because it is more of a mental condition than a physical one. And because it is a threat to their own gender roles.
If a child had cancer, and the doctor’s recommended procedure was a type of therapy that had the side-effect of the child growing up sterile and never being able to have kids, would it be child abuse for the parents to consent to such a treatment for their child? Yes or no?
If you answer “no” here, then just substitute “gender dysphoria” for “cancer”. If your answer changes, then why?
The real issue here isn’t supposed “child mutilation”, the real issue here is the refusal by some individuals to recognize the validity of gender dysphoria as a medical condition.
What other mental treatments do you support with physical actions? Electroshock?
I like how you repeat the debunked studies that are widely understood as flawed despite having those counter studies linked to you.
Should a parent encourage their anorexic kid to go on diets? Youre dealing with a dysmorphic disorder. Not a physical disorder dumbshit.
A kid who likes wheel chairs. Can a parent paralyze them?
Youre a ridiculous person.
I’d also like to know what exactly is the libertarian theory behind the socially conservative commenters around here who are defending this type of Michigan law.
Government should get out of the way and let free people make free choices – except when it comes to parenting, in which case, government should be intrusive and micromanaging parenting decisions, “for the sake of the children”? Is that the socially conservative approach to liberty?
Is it the role of the government to create rules that make a society “kid-friendly” even if the laws do not punish NAP violations? For example, do you favor laws that, say, prohibit liquor stores or bars from being within X feet of a school? Should it be illegal for kids to get tattoos, even if the parents consent? Do you favor laws that give preferential treatment to parents in the tax code?
And Jeff will use these same arguments to fuck children. They consented!
If I was a child born to insane parents who drank the neo-Marxist postmodern kool aid, yeah, I would want the state protecting my ability to reproduce too.
I think I get where you’re going with this and you are correct that these are murky waters for a hands off government approach. There’s some overlap between anti-HRT and anti-circumcision. More broadly, movements against parents doing anything with permanent consequences. I’m Jewish so circumcision bans bother me greatly. It’s like those societies are saying my religious beliefs and customs are backwards and that I am not allowed to practice them in their country. I worry that govts will start replacing parents and telling them what to teach their kids, what to eat, when to sleep, how many hours of games they can play, etc. I know that banning HRT on kids is another step down this path, but when you consider the consequences of what is happening to these kids, I don’t see a better alternative. I draw the line at parents chemically castrating their children, turning them mentally ill, giving them permanent hormonal imbalances, and destroying their future choices. It’s an advanced form of munchausen.
Well said.
“It’s one thing to say such treatments for minors should not be a first resort—that we should be cautious, and perhaps even require more medical checks and balances.”
That’s why medical & mental health professionals have protocols for this treatment.
And guess what? That treatment protocol does not include surgery, until the patient turns 18 (except in very extreme circumstances, and then the age limit is 16).
Puberty blockers are not “irreversible”; when the patient is off them, they go through puberty like anybody else, just later in life (and that’s no different than teens with “constitutionally delayed puberty”). As to the side effect of reduced bone density, this is why doctors combine puberty blockers with calcium supplements and bisphosphonates to counter that.
So before you jump on the Hard Right bandwagon of condemning these therapies, check the facts – including how, for many kids with gender dysphoria, this has been shown to greatly improve mental health outcomes, even if they don’t provide for as fast a transition as many would like.
Improved mental health outcomes like suicide.
Fixed it for ya.
“Puberty blockers are not “irreversible”; when the patient is off them, they go through puberty like anybody else, just later in life (and that’s no different than teens with “constitutionally delayed puberty”). As to the side effect of reduced bone density, this is why doctors combine puberty blockers with calcium supplements and bisphosphonates to counter that.”
Fake and debunked. Physical and mental development is not a water faucet. You cannot simply pause puberty like a TV show. There are real world effects to starting later and not developing while others do. HRT is carcinogenic. You are literally mutilating children because you are afraid to tell a trans person, who is well within their rights to live that way, that their ideas are incorrect.
The entire concept of “gender-affirming care” is that once a little boy, even if he’s three years old and autistic, says he’s a girl, there’s no turning back. It will be drummed into his head that he really is a girl, and he’ll be brainwashed into thinking that he wants to be chemically and surgically mutilated. ANYTHING else is considered transphobic.
NO, they DON’T just “go through puberty like everybody else. ” They are PERMANANTLY DAMAGED you credulous naïve half-wit.
Im fine with letting children have whatever treatments they want. The appropriate way to deal with this is the future lawsuits.
As a libertarian, what I don’t understand is the same people who call me crazy and accuse me of wanting to let kids smoke, drink, do drugs, and have sex withadults, now suddenly think children shouldn’t be protected from their own choices in this narrow sliver of an instance.
Past LP platforms advocated exactly those things under clever manipulation by Reaganista infiltrators and whack jobs. In fact, the current platform still does, but with a disclaimer saying not to believe what you just read in the line above. THIS lunacy is more troubling to me than anything Great Lakes looter partisans do or don’t. The LP needs to attract–not repel–voters. Minors (spoiler alert!) do not vote, but angry parents sure as Hell get out and vote against parties wearing “punch me” planks.
You know those annoying socialists who literally can’t imagine that someone could think laissez-faire economic policies are better for everyone, so they assume pro-free market people must just be trying to suck up to rich people, or suffer a deluded hope of becoming rich themselves? They are so full of themselves, so unable to comprehend that anyone could believe the world works differently than how Karl Marx said it did, so they assume anyone who disagrees with them must have some ulterior motive.
This is what all the transphobes in the comments are reminding me of. It isn’t just that they disagree with the basic beliefs behind what being transgender is, or how effective gender-affirming care is. That’s understandable and reasonable. What isn’t reasonable is how they seem incapable of imagining that other people might disagree with them about the facts of the issues. They seem to think that all the doctors providing gender-affirming care agree with them 100% that it is mistaken and doesn’t work, and are just doing it for the money. Transphobes seem to think that all supportive parents agree 100% with them that trans kids are deluded and are just helping their children in some bizarre attempt to show fealty to progressive ideology.
It is this repulsive misanthropy that reveals the inherent unreasonableness of these people, both socialists and transphobes. They literally cannot imagine that people disagree with them about whether a policy has positive or negative consequences. So they assume everyone fully agrees with them that a policy’s consequences are negative, and just want the negative consequences to happen for some nefarious reason.
“This is what all the transphobes in the comments…”
Oh my. That you resort to pigeonholing multiple reasoned and rational arguments with a buzzword connoting an irrational fear while simultaneously talking about bad faith arguments is nothing more than prima facie evidence that it is always and everywhere projection when dealing with the no enemies to the left crowd.
You are as tiresome as you are trite. What you think is rhetorical jiu jitsu is really nothing more than effectless sloganeering.
But, by all means, continue on with you self delusions. My only advice would be to ask yourself – at this stage of the game what is it coming next that you will called upon to defend with a (albeit feigned) straight face?
Do you even care?
You are refusing to acknowledge the difference between making bad choices for yourself and imposing objectively harmful choices on children. Yes, there are “libertarian” extremists, such as Brian above, who would give complete self-determination to children, but you’ll find very few here. Most of us recognize that children have a limited capacity to direct their own lives and need guidance from adults. It is irrelevant that some parents and therapists disagree with objective reality. They are wrong, and their children should be protected from them.
The name of this place is Reason so we are supposed to consider things for what they objectively are.
The left “libertarians” here saw no real trouble with laws preventing parents from imposing FGM on their children because that was icky Islam.
But they have no trouble with such mutilation done in the name of ‘science.’
As if they are both not religions.
Which is why, as I alluded to earlier, they all must double down. The consequences of turning back being acknowledging external limits on their authority and power.
Except it hasn’t turned out that way.
Here is a criminally stupid defense
New Jersey governor refuses to ban child marriage because ‘it would conflict with religious customs’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-jersey-chris-christie-child-marriage-ban-fails-religious-custom-a7735616.html
So if there is a custom of hurting and ruining someone’s life, so be it — in the name of freedom.
Remember the 11-year old Yemeni girl
https://www.firstpost.com/world/id-rather-die-eleven-year-old-yemeni-girl-fights-child-marriage-in-viral-video-979063.html
“This is what all the transphobes…”
The only people who have an irrational fear of people afflicted with gender dysphoria are those who call others ‘transphobes.’
I support this completely.
So… any offsets, like Michiganders maybe legalizing electric power reactors or repealing the State income tax?
I’m actually good on this. Children should be allowed the time to discovery things for themselves. Society started taking that away in the 80’s.
Our society is schizophrenic on this. On the one hand, we have greatly restricted the freedom of children, compared to all previous generations, by treating them as if they are helpless and stupid. On the other hand, we often saddle them with expectations and responsibilities that are grossly age-inappropriate, such as letting them choose which sex they are, or trying barely teenage offenders as adults in court.
Vernon, you actually describe the crippling of the family vis-a-vis the state. And that is why you speak in such all-encompassing terms.
Give parents more rights about schools, keep Feds out of local affairs (in my state they force with unfunded mandates small communities to have unisex bathrooms), and remember that in previous generations kids weren’t raised in families where they would say “Dad, I want to be a boy, I am sick of being a girl”
As to trying teenage offenders as adults , I don’t see your point at all. Just last week a 15-year old boy : Raleigh, North Carolina, shooting leaves at least 5 people dead
We will see whether the ‘fact’ he couldn’t be tried as an adult had anything to do with it
Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman said that if Thompson survives, she expects he would be charged as an adult, despite his age.
“In consideration of the mass number of lives lost, it’s appropriate that this case be handled in Superior Court and this individual prosecuted as an adult.”
I don’t see your point at all.
My point is that holding very young people responsible for their behavior as if they were adults is inconsistent with the severe restrictions we place on them on the grounds that their youth makes them incompetent to see to their own safety. I thought that was obvious.
We have had hundreds of millions of people over several thousand years and what they have discovered for themselves is called culture/heritage/tradition. It is not always right but ‘discovering on your own” is almost always the worst way to go. I tell my kids “Be careful, especially of doing what can NEVER be changed”
This has got – on one’s 18th birthday one committed statutory rape on one’s girlfriend who tomorrow will turn 18 – written all over it.
More crappy Power-Mad [WE] mob Gov-Gun usage of the Right when it comes to “its for the children” cries; as it has been for many years.
Humorously if the “children” were considered more-so Individuals with age instead of full property of the [WE] foundation it would already be easily seen as against the law to force another into medical procedures.
I don’t say anything humorous in that.
So if a boy says “she is my girlfriend’ he can do whatever he wants
That is the opposite of humorous and I would not let you near my daughter.
This bill and others like it are only the beginning of the end for DIMRATS who have been busy destroying this country. It should be a felony charge not just against parents but also on the clinics, hospital administrators and doctors who conduct gender affirming treatment and surgeries. Wake up America.
A great law…if we allow the real victims to be heard
Former Trans Teen Launches Organization to Support Detransitioner
https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/10/13/former-trans-teen-launches-organization-to-support-detransitioners/
Now I will post the following and others will say that further legal and medical developments severely diminish the force of the post BUT THAT SHOWS THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING SIMPLE AT ALL
In the UK on 12/1/20, Keira Bell age 23 won her case against the NHS Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service. The Court determined that adolescents and children under age 16 are NOT capable of giving consent to life-altering medical and surgical interventions such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries to address gender dysphoria. Further, at ages 16-17 physicians should consider obtaining a court order for such treatment. This is a major win in the fight against the rampant medical transing of children. You can read the judgment for yourself by searching Bell-v-Tavistock.
Here is her story
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11065005/I-never-changed-gender-16-Brave-young-woman-reveals-story-Tavistock-clinic.html